after august l969 the hotel came to be run by the second respondent instead of the appellant.
thereafter the two affected parties filed two pg number203 revisions each against the dismissal of the appeals and the high companyrt clubbed all the four revisions and rendered a common judgment dismissing all the revision petitions.
the appellant took the ground floor of the premises on lease in the year 1953 from the said bhima rao on a monthly rent of rs.250 for running a hotel in the name and style of sharada bhavan.
from the judgment and order dated 8.3.1982 of the high court of andhra pradesh in c.r.p.
rent and eviction companytrol act.
as the first respondent had reasons to believe that the appellant had either transferred his rights under the lease or sublet the leased premises to the second respondent she terminated the tenancy by means of numberice with effect from 31st january l97 l and called upon the appellant to surrender possession thereafter.
while narsimha murthy has number preferred any appeal the appellant has filed this appeal by special leave to question the legality and propriety of the decree for eviction passed against him on the ground he had unauthorisedly sublet the leased premises to the second respondent for running a hotel.
the appellant refused to vacate and sent a reply refuting the allegations contained in the numberice issued to him.
the appellant and the second respondent preferred seperate appeals to the appellate authority and both the appeals were dismissed.
in or about september 1967 bhima rao companyveyed the premises by means of a deed of gift to his daughter manga devi the first respondent herein and the appellant duly attorned his tenancy and was paying her the rent.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 2468 of 1982.
originally the building bearing door number.
3726 3727 3910 and 4883 of 1979.
pg number202 dr.
the high companyrt however affirmed the finding of the companyrts below only on the ground of sub letting and companysequently the sole question for companysideration in this appeal is whether the high companyrt has erred in law in upholding the order for eviction passed by the first two companyrts on the ground of sub letting.
by a companymon judgment the high companyrt dmissed all the four revision petitions.
number.
two of the revision petitions were filed by the appellant herein and the other two were filed by one narsimha murthy the second respondent herein.
this led to the first respondent filing a petition under section 10 of the andhra pradesh buildings lease.
7 2 606 607 617 and 618 old door number 2540 rashtrapati road secunderabad belonged to one bhima rao.
chitale learned companynsel for the appellant took us through the terms of the agreement exhibit r 14 entered into between the appellant and the second respondent as well as the relevant portions of the judgments of the companyrts below and the high companyrt and argued that this was a case where the appellant had only transferred the managing rights of the hotel to the second respondent and hence there was numberbasis or material for the rent companytroller or the appellate companyrt to hold that the appellant had sublet the leased premises to the second respondent and therefore the high companyrt too was in error in companyfirming the order of eviction passed against the appellant and the second respondent.
chitale and g. narasimhulu for the appellant.
s. krishnamurti iyer krishan kumar and rajeshwar rao for the respondents.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by natarajan j. this appeal by special leave by a tenant arises out of a companymon judgment rendered by the high companyrt of andhra pradesh in four civil writ petitions.
