High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Basappa Fakirappa Koppa vs Sri Surendra Shantharam … on 17 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Basappa Fakirappa Koppa vs Sri Surendra Shantharam … on 17 March, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
in me: HIGH counr or KARIIATAKA AT aaxqmgoxzz

mmn ms THE 17»: mm: or %  A %   _

BETWEEN:

R10 CTS Nc.54._96, 8g..E0_-295,  ' "

\J'U'lNlD V1.33;-.,:u:5u..u.9a3'&uua.' , v- V

'I'q-    ---P31111033"

n in-rIn_  "
H111}: * .

.&.u,sg_n;1g.n  :52 

 X '1'I'o.i*'5;"iEfi|'3'2 an the iii: In Inn

 V3':§§_jBau;:1m. ...RE8PONDE!l'1'

   3 file.-I1 mm St_at_:rI_:|_o:; 115 of cm
 the order dnbad 29.11.2I'I)7 pnnled in I-IRE'. RP

_1I ..'I__ 1-" 1.1.11 'l"'I..'_...u. I'...l__
In aunt. Mun uuugug

V. ' Emgaurn. dhnfinaing the paflflan and oonflrmim the
'  "a..n_ri:aa- dated 25.2.2032 panned an HRC Nn.1BOI89 n 
" 1 fi.'.-.. cf the I 95% Ci-.r11 J1-.a;r.l._:rI..-; [Jr=_lf_1z1g3; jug, 

%    petitioner fllnd u;s._27_;_31(a) fun: :33} the RR Aot

. .|I'I-....4....'I 1...;

Luis. iiiifiai and (oi oi'   nasrmt uonuu: nut.
1961), Act uaaldng eviction.

-nu. u-nnrn Mmum nu -Ii-nu mlmlunlnn 11»: chair. the
ILII .ILI\.l'I-I Vllllnlllufi VII lnlul Iulllinlullullrunnrunn I-un-- 1-I-'ry V---r

Court made the follqwzlng:



1&3

_u-.-.1:----.

During the course otfthe order, that 
be rem-red to as per the ranking in the  

in linbla tn ha  I791'   ' rm    A" :n  V' _
The petitioner has made o1if'$ ea.§e   an
fixundry business   Damodnr

It-3.9. 1:3;-m   Work at

Dhnrwar   3i"1'5"1i"nfi&":.i'fi '."'."r-rh

at   Anngollmr 
at  mafia. He has about 150-200
en1pbveau_   ~ . Hahn .. 

 .5-'.m.~,%>de....en ta t..l.\.-9 ,_;*l.e'|.'.|'|'.!.l.;.!'..l!.|.'|..'.1 @pm¢.e:.a;,

»   has his own apnea situaiaaci mi:  Sham':

 '--  wherein there are about 28 block:

  an Anngollnu Chawl or Dnnodu Chnwl

    an  mostly by the tenants and osmium

ma paliliia fir". The pa'.:'."'-....:.-*-..e.'-  tinge ,-1.v.-'v-....._..*--

  ii): an purpoue ofpt'ov1d"inggo-down' 'both caused and

open for Itxu-5.113 tin raw-mntaarinln. Th: petition-.u' hug
"Vt

/

%I''" 9 '



{Id

mhmagodownonbmeatvadagaomwhbhh

'_____,mL,_,t., inmiequntn, innuficiaut and urntgitabla.

Tim p-uti'd'mm~ mum-'u warm 5%» as $1'-.9.

has pmpnrcd plan and he   * 

does mt hm suitable .1...-,..... 
:~.:.=.-gr--~..'-.e........:ai 1: a _-J.-u.»    of %
Cumequnntly, the  under section
21[1]{aJ, (:1 gm  an Control Act,

   'nan iiind his objaaaora 'iy

  ofthe petition until; that tho

   the premium for his bonnfide

      Eur Imring raw mutant' and tho

lull'!

 AA  z  "also cnniaaui tianttimy no mtinnuun oi'

  The oumand substance in am ofhotal denial. 

-/ff,



mltinhobenotioadthatklalllswiution

mfi1:1*.ar. wfi ea.-.."..'.'.% waa 9..-...'~....n=:'..e='. .....--'-";a~;~='-'i.«,._...x-f-'-,V....*.~.

artist 'I passed.
mm" -1: t1r1e.n pgmiogg   m» %

..!..l............

iiifrpaf-r' Iif his Evmaxlca B.--w..E%!. '% n.uq""' '*-"w.-we uunuu.

    Judas, having 1-«ma in tin

   ""  the petlflonecr as well an the
  all the 13 uIncuon' ' _pot1t.1n"nI undncr

 fi_.L":g'1{1}rh| 6:' +1.. 'bunt canons] Am 195";

XII' "KICK YIIKTJ I IN!"

 1 gma-agjunaing in Eactinn Sififiiiri affine  mm
_  1999. but however. rqiected aviation petition on
 nthur grounds. Sam: of tha rupnndauln haw film!

wfléinnbghm The revhional ._

/



IQ

Couruhavhuregardmflwwfiwmhthahaa

t:......-- a.'|.1.. _...n..la..I......

WIKELIIIU IJLIIIL

7. Ineridonmlly. it in to    Z 
would mum to I-IRC Na.1kao;a-9%   

 

12.9.1

:-gimrozi ’11-.a.a j;

~ s’.’t’=_I’§’.. “:1¥;s-” tunuainnrmri’; :H_,

was diponod of under the

_ Section 2’7[9J(:-J cf the Kmmtala

Thu law rag_Irdim_: the uquirummt

«I-.4544! Ian. Jnonidnnulnln
I-WWI Ll-I Illnlullnlnll-«IM\III-an-tr

E’

an i…, innl. zoos L *– mi and aun-flrrm
«:49. zoo-1¢s)m.J44 am. A perusal ofthn mung. in
thalightnffimdnaiinm ruudarad by an. com-umura

……….-m-Ir-» it aL=.;nd____,–vthr, r.slnn…_r t_l.n.;t than !:_n gt. inf?

/’

mopeotoftharequimnantofthe landlord and the can
puummptinn is certainly mahuthnble. Anotfmr aoryiifion

11-‘h%u*h is 1-a1;uira=’u % be aa-.*.:’.-.g”.e-A ‘-….-:…*°~m t’.’.’.:’.s’~.e’.v’.,_.’=t.’V«.<.-:1

could be grnnmd undo!' Suction '£Tr7"i§ir) %
landlord ohnuld not have an alwmtg x
«am mm man. be an %
11.91.. m by ma
found that 11: um m£'§i;i'i1§ibl§a;::' had no option.
but, to mimg malpflct of the
peuuon she cannot be said

the we of the aruu"" fir

gqdownv. _ 2 open In! aha to home hi

" _ pm'tnB said requiremecnt. oartainbr has an

9.ConnequemJy.Iamoft1wviawthatfl:noaid

U concurrent findimu cannot be faullnd, innmwch II,

t.:.ni.;.._-at samaian 1:5 1’tc_h_:_a(_!:.:d_g cfcivil the _

W” ” –/L,
‘J

jurbdiution which can be wretched by this court in way

Iulcl iii! ‘fi”‘ium’L.’u, Junluwuuu U1 u”.-ara

tin situation in iiia *’-*
concurrent findings he does not

_lffhmmgfifidfiuaflmfimnamdchmmmummn

wag. the via: that there is no merit in

1u mfi#m§$@§nfimLEmfihnunflnmflmuh

ll

safe;

Judge

Au-