Sri Sukumar Salian S/O Alte … vs Smt Vishalakshi W/O Puttaraju on 11 February, 2009

H.E.Ii'.P.NO.20[ ZQQ9

in THE man comm' or mmvarmm AT nmemmnx
DATED TI-I18 THE 11% DAY or mnmmav 2009 __
swam: V %

ms Homnm mlmusrrcm H.c+.12Aumn_f"  * --' %   

BETWEEN:

SR1 SUKUMAR SALIAN

S/0 LATE SANJEEV SALIAN

AGE: ABOUT «as "YEARS '

R/AT' Ncmss, 11 FLOOR, 53:: MAIN  '

4m BLOCK,RA..IAJ1NAGARW   , 

BANGALORE-560 010  .% _ -.  g  ,.PETITIONER

(BY SR} K.G0v:NDARAJ 0PMw,i$.j'VP.N--EHRU'3s ASSOCIATES.
ADVQCATES4    '    ' 

AND:

SMT. vlsmmksfli 
W/O PU'i'I'ARA;§.U - V ._
AGE: AESOIET 32 YEARS

 V. R /A'1"_N"O.6J8, W 'D' ';'vmi.NROAD
" ,  'Ci»:0PQ ROAD. SHNANAGARA
'1_B.'=J§G-ALO§2Ee56_O"Q_I0 ..nns:-ozmzmr

131*. SR; N.'  m. ADVOCATE.)
Vrazs' 'H..ié.R.P. IS FILED ws. 46(1) OF THE K.R.AC'I',

 4 1999 A.GA=.¥_NS'I' THE ORDER D"I'.3. 1.2009 PASSED IN

"   "..H.i?nC.TNO.4'€i---/O8 ON THE FILE OF' THE IX ADDL. JUDGE, COURT

  V SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MAC?»-7 BANGALORE,
 R%'EI'C_'AF'ENG THE APPLICATION WITH COST OF RS200/--*

THiS PET1TiON COMENG ("JN FOR ADMISSiON THiS DAY,

 "ms COURT MADE THE mmowrue:

Hausa Rea? Revision Pe?ifignfl_q_    4 '* 



H.§.E.P.N0.20¢f 2009

ORDER

This revision petition by the tenant is .. V.

against an interlocutory order dated ‘ 1 ‘V

passed by the trial Court~t.he ec;1ifi.%o:it meet eAa¢11§*l

Judge, Court of Small

H.R.(3.No.46/2008, rejecting ‘tl::e’»applieation-I fiieelllley
the petitioner under Qrder 2 with
Section 151 of the T’ summon
the parents of

2. It the respondent-

landlorclethasl eviction petition in

H.R.c.No.4’6/2″o<Je tL~:de£' section 27(2)(r) of the

Rent 1999, for eviction of the

from the petition premises. The trial

Cot1rt;'lon.eor_tsitIeran'on of the matter, has rejected the.

lappliootéon filed by the petitioner with the following

' reasoning:

‘4. This is a petition filed U/s.27(2)(r) of

h V ll ffizmataka Rent Act 1999for eviction ofthe tenant

5’! //
‘/’

Q. R.R.P.No. 262 g 009

on the ground that petitioner requires the
premises forhis personal use and cccupation. V ‘

5. The scope of enquiry of this petition_; ~ : E

not involve the advance amount

respondent and the arrears of Ifséiii .; ‘

does not involve the pfiint :

deducted out of the
raised by the, petitioner on If
any caused by tenz;§rs~t&_ to
amount of R$;5o,oao/–~ point for
there is no

need to to prove that
respondent amomt of
R350, O00/-fr}: an. % .

I fmd no ‘in thé ~ of the trial Court in

IBj65C?,iv1″iAg:V”f!”}:1}€ filed by the pefisioner to

:;”V’.$_I1I1H1&.I-“X me p’h;;;e’n:sk'(%or the mpmdamamlora as

witnesses. ”

‘ R«:visi_¢n petition dismissed. ;

g sali
xuaqe