High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Padmavathi vs Smt K Kotramma on 11 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Padmavathi vs Smt K Kotramma on 11 March, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 

M Im ".15  mu DAY 01? MAP"H_.'.?{9L.;." Q 5  % 

J..J'JI-J.J-'lJ.J' &£l~I.\\.I :5

BEFORE V  b

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE_AJ§'i'«...5'.

I-I.R.R.P NC:S'?T..v8/§'0(V:)'7'     

Smt. Padmavathi, _
'.I!{o.La.n.tc.A.nji11.e.ppe.,  '
Aged about 60 years,  I
R/'at.'fi.No.6jS5j3,;TJ'L'V  .  ' _ _ V
Ward No.12, , .V  >  "

Kalmatt1,R¢dd5r§   ~ _ 

   -._.PF.'l'l'l'IONER

(By sma.   iTkTaia%,LAciv.)

AND: ..

 "  1,  '

   

 'W/'nehatefii-Naaanpa.
 

 
 S/o.Late Iwasavva.
 AL I Agedhbout 48 years,

_ _----_

g Sio.La'u:e K.1agup
T Agad about 36 yams,
A 4' Kiri-liiiin'
J"?

D/o.Latx: K.Nagappa,
Aged about 35  -- 



 are residing at
D.No. 10, Ward No. 18,
001331 Swamy Road,

('I
\..Ia-llll

mm. up D n a. mu: 1IntInue',Q;a;::'a-Ifirwu 1.1%». n+'3+_I'u-. <
ll'-I-3 Ill-I-'ll\OJ I 'W Isl-I'-I'-I w'"v' -K' .1'-nI\.l1¢I»  '1-Fl I-I"J'

Code of Civil Procedure 'against *-the 
22.11.2002 passed in ir-T.'u'"_'.fRcvis'icn_1_1"~Ae  tuition
No.12]2005 on the tile 91' the  Disttictlfiesaions
Judge, Bellary partly ailpwirig the,' petition  under
Sec'dan27{2'i{1}ofK.R.Act.J--.    .. 

This H.R.R.'P_.   admission, this day,
the Court madc'ti1s:'fo11tnvf.Iri_g':    = 

_    
 order, the parties would
be referredteetae   in the Trial Court.

  :2. A.  have let out the premises in

   ijespondcnt on a monthly rent of 123.25] -

1; m. nt_hlv .en_.__c:y eemflegeg Lrom

'    to the petitioners, the tenant is in arrears of

h V.  _;fe-int from September 1982. Despite various demands,

 '  the respondent has not paid the rents. The statutory

Bellary — 533302. …REsmHDENEre

:=

u3uI

notice dated 10.04.1993 was issued dc1nandjx1g’aI’réa.rs

of rent amounting to Rs.4,70O /- for the 9

sonnnnber 1972 up to April 1998. An

5,l.V’¢l.I fin a !’ -s,gu_

5….-. Of Rs.5§m,I=.:l.5.-a§._j

arrears of rent. According torthc V

due was Rs.4,125/-. Hence, ‘lil1c_”»1~::opoiidoti:1tv’in to
be evicted under secuongz 1(‘i)(o_§o£_ Rent

Co… .1 A_…, 196;, It ls..t.f;_elr respondent,

without coo§9c:§1§;_:”l”Tll::Vicspondcnt has also
put 111?, a ._coiV1Si1o1cflon.Vb_Without the permission of the
local aufllofifioo consent of the landlord.

en…_ic,” 1:. -::v “9. nlilc to be ctrlctcd. u.t1r_1cr Bcctioxl

.-noun–an

Rent (‘;onf1″iA’-u., l9:-51. They

moo nooloootono that the original landlord had mod 9.

; suif” inoto;s”.No.135/1994 restraining the respondent

K x V’ .l’1’om__plitting up any construction. But however, the

-4-

arrears of rent and she has paid the rents
she is not a defaulter. She would contend ”

LL: Viol. uuu you uuuuuau ta. 1-… ‘-w’ up 3…-…£~_-ip.–“…’ —

mound under Section fiiiijicj
turtzher contend that she’ -has not pntV*d- .
construction in violation of 2 ‘eon}diflons

and she is not liable ms secuoe 2l(1)(o)

4. A’J1.1d’ge’–;AI1avh1g mgard to the

-we ‘V ow M’ “Lee opinion t..h.e.t mm
petitioners the relief under .’3ecu”on

21(1)?! of itheivhct; Bvut’ in so far as Section

V’ ‘”21(i)iE:) is concex-ned’,’.”iVt was dismissed as a@inst which,

a revision before the learned

the evidence let in by the parties has

i hemmed the findings remrding the arrears of rent.

in so far as eviction under Section 21(l)[c) of the

«met It Rent C no! Act, 1961, has

./.’-”

same and has granted eviction on that count aieo,

Hence, this petition by the respondent

5. Incmentany, it is to be noticed d on d

proceedings were initiated in the
Kamataka Rent Control Act _ Bnt %

u… r…-.-..–.-.. -7-‘ _,.____…

fh– nmdeucy of me

Control Act Waslrepiéeed’ Act, 1%.

Hence, the     'the learned
Trial Judge      of the new

Act.  """  .  d M

6.  counsel appearing

tbr the submits that having regani to the

‘~,J.I3\.r|.u’ I:I.L.I.\.I .\.au.uu.g.u.wunua.-uv uv uu.-.-

-..;-.:e. cunt! lV;I;r\?UIfflfl’I”flfI!’flS’ I’v\th Q11 “Q, ____i;H_g_1 we

not the respondent is in

H V’ of rent far as putting up a construction without

is concerned, he submits that the finding is

recorded in the earlier pmoeeamgs i.c., in the

V’ ;’.’:+ :…….a.n. 4…: 1… +1. I-Minn…-.

lauliitcu 113 L116 p\.”””uuu1ua=Iu

/,”7/7”

7. I 113% p-:.:’u…… the 2.-rz-.3.’-‘-.:g.-‘:e.r’.. @er by

the learned Judge as well as the learned e
Judge. In so far as the finding recorded
2’7(2)(a) of the Act conesponding:-to arts’ it

the old Act, I am ofthe View that

:.’.”.’i-‘~ 41:…

um.-

as-uncvn uasuucnv-ml-Its “‘t\II1’Il” ‘V HQ 4’. _

3.’ ‘HI’ ‘- .’lK1lt”_I Fl-‘1″-“Io

1” “V6 03 ll.UI..Il.l5.I.1I.l xumuxu fiut..{ –

respondent is in a11ea::*s..V_oi* to the
same, I am of the view cannot be
faulted. t t W h

of the new Act is
conoerned,. wfiieuiet Judge in her revietonal
pewer iiéttn’ mg Jmnoeedinns mlanm tn the

V_.– — ___ V11 7-; .. I… — — .. .– .-.—..—.-.j– —- —.-..–:..-T, –_ .__

‘ _ ….. ..__._a. :…..I-…__..a..1…..
ll. .Il.ul.aI.l.l.CLI Ll

Cl!
7?

hi
0:

an _

–..

3

5
III!-

I

–r

against demolition and construction

Premises. Appanently. it is to be

‘,notiouec1 while disposing of the appeal filed by the

his C urt moditied. Lhe judmnent
.,…

‘HA4-I rung ‘Ann .n.’ Vanni whom no –

” ma decree in rt..st. I\io.iG8ii%8 and the suit of inc”

” netitioner was partly decreed and the respondent was

permanently restrained from demolishing the scheduke M
“/7

.-fflf ‘

premises and putting up a new constructions
except in accordance with law. In fact
and decree was made available to the _

-Ju..ge; In pe.._.J.3..’2 V t V’ A’
Judge has considered the tine?’ *’
appeal. In fact while dealin§’*t=:Vr§;iptIr1_Vt:l1e” etieecuon A
27(2)(1) of the Act, Judge also
observed that the has not
%:1 said find}?-‘ is

based on disc” mansion on the
said will not advance the case

of the re5]§onden.t;t:V..’A’ regard to the fact that a

_ is the learned District Judge that

‘ ‘J ‘ I-I-J_.2ILrIIa3I CI.IL\J.I- Kiel’-Ill -l..luIh.ll.l\-l.J.lul.5 “I

I-an. In ‘idly:

1;; utiuunfi

“end newly constructed buiiding did not

d d L men ttvim’ the features and the characters of the

which was let out to the tenant as per the

uphctegraph produced at Exs.P1(a) as {.13}, a case

. c» 1…. 44..- …..a..u.:………… J.-…._ …:..a..1…….. -….I.__
I. Hy Ll]. uuu 1 3 101 CV1UI.fl.lI.l (J.

1)
Section 27(2)(l) ofthe Act. 9%

9. Having regard to -the findings recorded

Courts below, on the question ofarreara of I’|’=__!ii:’_.*« I; _

I-‘nan –:1:-flu lama’-

4- In
LII I LIJIIL

‘ lawns-nun-rm-a-I nun-vlgclfi
as p 5:11:11 Uxuuza

E?

below do not warren    i'

this petition.

Petition stands  

  .:        Ixgdqé