MARIYAM BEGUM versus BASHEERUNNISA BEGUM AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 345 · Decided: 26-09-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.S.M. QUADRI, S.N. PHUKAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

MARIYAM BEGUM 
A 
v. 
BASHEERUNNISA BEGUM AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 26, 2001 
[SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] 
B 
Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 
1960: 
S. 10(2 )( i)-Eviction qf tenant on ground of wilful d~fault in payment of 
rent-Landlady's petition for eviction qf tenant.for de.fault in payment of rent-
Another petition for eviction on ground qf sub-letting-A third petition .for 
eviction on ground qf wilful d~fault in payment qf rent for a d(fferent period-
Eviction on ground qfwilful d~fault and sub-letting allowed by Rent Controller 
and High Court-Tenant's plea that since an I.A. uls. 11.filed in the.first petition 
was pending she thought that she need not deposit rent till matter was decided 
by Court and immediately after decision in the matter she deposited rent and 
as such there was no wi(ful default-Held, during pendency qf I.A. tenant was 
represented by advocate-She had the advantage of seeking advice from him, 
if she had any doubt-There has been indifference rather supine indifference to 
the obligation of payment of rent-Tenant's appeal dismissed. 
J. Jemzons v. Aliammal & Ors., [1999] 7 SCC 382, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1715 of 1997. 
c 
D 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.8.96 of the Andhra Pradesh High 
p 
Court in C.R.P. No. 873 of 1993. 
WITH 
Civil Appeal No. 1716 of 1997. 
Ms. K. Amreshwari, P. Venkat Reddy, Ms. R. Madhvi Lata and Guntur 
Prabhakar for the Appellant. 
Mahender Anand and Rajiv Nanda for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
345 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
346 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
The parties in these two appeals are common. The appellant is the tenant 
in these appeals. and the first respondent is the landlady. 
i 
j t'. I 
.._1 
I 
( 
Civil Appeal No. 1715/97 is from the order of the High Court of Andhra 
Pradesh in CRP 873/93 passed on August 7, 1996. Civil Appeal No. 1716/97 
is from the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in CRP 17 /93 passed 
on December 10, 1996. 
· 
· 
' 
·• · 
, '· 
,, 
To appreciate the qu.estions that arise i!1 these cases, it will t;>e appropriate 
to refer to the facts giving rise to these appeals briefly. The respondent filed 
RC 244/83 in the Court of llnd Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, for 
eviction of the appellant from the premises No. H. No, 11-4-773 & 11-4-773/ 
1, Bazar Street, Hyderabad, (for short 'the building') on various grounds 
including d.efault in payment of rent for the period - May 1, 1983 to October 
31, 1983 under Section 10 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) 
Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act'). While the said RC was pending, she 
file<;t RC 20/85 before the Rent Gontroller seeking eviction of the respondent 
under Section 10(2)(ii)(a) of the Act on the ground that she has sublet a portion 
of the suit premises to the second respondent therein who is cru:rying on the 
business of supplying building material in the name of and style of Mis 
~hyama Traders. She als9 filed RC 115/84 in the Court of Principal Rent 
Controller, on the. ground that. the respondent .committed wilful default,in 
payment of rent for the period - November 1, 1983 to 31st March, 1984, under 
Section 10(2)(i) of the Act. While these cases were pending the first case, RC 
244/83, was dismissed on• April '.4; 1988. The order of dismis.sal in that R.C. 
has become final. 
'' .. 
I 
; 
I. 
t 
'; 
In so far as the RC 115/84 (filed on the .ground of wilful default) is 
F 
concerned, the learned Rent Controller'found that the respondent committed 
wilful default in payment of rent and ordered eviction. That order was upheld 
in appeal as well as in revision by the High Court. It is from this order Civil 
Appeal 1716/97 arises. 
On the ground of sub-letting the learned Rent Controler ordered eviction 
G 
taking the view that subletting was proved. However, on appeal the learned 
Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, set aside the judgment of 
the Rent Controller and 'allowed the appeal on October 28, 1992. The matter 
was carried to the High Court in CRP 873/93 and by. order dated 7.8.96 the 
High Court set aside the order of the appellate authoi:ity and restored the order 
H 
of the learned Rent Controller and thus allow~d the revisi9n. From that order 
-. 
MARIYAM BEGUM v. BASHEERUNNISA BEGUM 
Civil Appeal 1715/97 arises. 
347 
So far as Civil Appeal 1716/97 is concerned Ms. K. Amr

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.