Sri P V Kosalram vs Smt K Nagamma
2023 Latest Caselaw 542 Kant

                            1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                          BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

       HOUSE RENT REVISION PETITION NO.15/2014 (EVI)

BETWEEN:

SRI P.V. KOSALRAM
S/O V.P. VEERAPPAN,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.16,
KUMARASWAMY NAIDU ROAD,
FRAZER TOWN,
BANGALORE-560 005.
                                             ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI K. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. K. NAGAMMA
W/O. LATE KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
GROUND FLOOR SHOP PREMISES,
AT NO.1/1, RANGAMMA GARDEN,
PSK NAIDU ROAD, DODDIGUNTA,
COX TOWN, BANGALORE-560 005.

ALSO AT:

SMT. NAGAMMA K.
NO.10, FIRST CROSS,
KADRAPPA ROAD, DODDIGUNTA,
COX TOWN, BANGALORE-560 005.
                             2



SINCE DEAD BY HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

1(A) SRI NAGABHUSHAN
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
     S/O KRISHNAPPA,

1(B) SRI VISHNU
     AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
     S/O KRISHNAPPA,

     BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.10,
     KADRAPPA ROAD, 1ST CROSS,
     COX TOWN, BANGALORE-560 005.

1(C) SMT. MEENA
     AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
     W/O MURALI PRASAD,
     R/AT NO.275, 7TH 'A' MAIN,
     3RD BLOCK, 1ST STAGE,
     HBR LAOUT, BANGALORE-560 073.

     (R1(A) TO R1(C) AMENDED CARRIED OUT
     AS PER ORDER DATED 24.11.2016)
                                           ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI A. SUBRAMANYA PRAMOD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (A & B))

     THIS HRRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 46(1) OF THE
KARNATAKA RENT ACT, 1999 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 27.11.2013 PASSED IN HRC.NO.181/2012 ON
THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER
SECTION 27(2)(r) OF THE KARNATAKA RENT ACT 1999.


     THIS HRRP COMING ON FOR FINAL DISPOSAL THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                 3



                           ORDER

This HRRP under Section 46(1) of the Karnataka Rent Act,

1999, is filed challenging the order dated 27.11.2013 passed by

the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes at Bangalore in

H.R.C.No.181/2012, dismissing the petition filed under Section

27(2)(r) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999.

2. The petitioner who is the purchaser of the subject

premises by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 29.03.2011

issued a notice to the respondent-tenant, calling upon him to

vacate the subject premises, stating that he is the purchaser of

the subject premises and also the same is required for his

residential purpose.

3. The respondent issued a reply to the said notice

denying the relationship of landlord and tenant, and also stated

that there was no attornment of tenancy and also denied other

averments made in the notice.

4. The petitioner filed a petition for evicting the

respondent-tenant from the subject premises. Petitioner in

order to prove his case examined himself as P.W.1, and got

marked the documents at Exs.P1 to P3, and the respondent in

order to disprove the case of the petitioner, examined himself as

DW.1 and got marked the documents as Exs.R1 to R2. The Trial

Court after examining the evidence on record dismissed the

petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner-landlord submits

that there is no requirement under the provision of the Act, 1999

to issue notice of attornment of tenancy, and in the absence of

any dispute that the petitioner stepped into the shoes of the

landlord by virtue of the registered sale deed executed in his

favour, the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court is

not sustainable in law.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent-tenant would submit that the petition filed for

eviction of the subject premises in the absence of relationship of

landlord and tenant, the learned Trial Court has rightly dismissed

the suit as not maintainable. He further submits that there is no

pleadings/averments in the petition that the subject premises is

required for the self-occupation to maintain the petition for

eviction.

7. I have examined the submissions made by the

learned counsel appearing for the parties.

8. Ex.P.1 is the copy of the registered sale deed

conveying the subject premises in favour of the petitioner for

valuable consideration. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a notice

calling upon the respondent-tenant to vacate the subject

premises stating that the same is required for residential

purpose.

9. The tenant replied to the said notice denying the

relationship of landlord and tenant stating that there is no

attornment of tenancy after the petitioner purchased the subject

premises. The petitioner has categorically stated that he

acquired the title over the property by virtue of the registered

sale deed and the subject premises is required for his personal

occupation and the petition is supported by an affidavit.

10. Only requirement under Section 27(2)(r) of the

Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 is that the petitioner landlord has to

establish that the subject premises is required for self

occupation. The petitioner landlord has categorically stated that

he requires the subject premise for residential occupation .

11. The provisions of Act, 1999 are applicable and there

is no requirement for attornment of tenancy under the act to

maintain a petition for eviction, since the provisions of Transfer

of Property act are not applicable to the subject premises.

12. In view of the preceding analysis, the Petitioner

having satisfied the requirement of Section 27(2)(r) of the Act,

1999, the respondent is liable to be evicted.

13. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) The HRRP is allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 27.11.2013 passed by the

Court of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes at Bangalore in

H.R.C.No.181/2012 is set aside. Consequently, the petition filed

under Section 27(2)(r) of the Act, 1999 by the petitioner is

hereby allowed.

iii) The respondent-tenant is directed to hand over the

vacant possession of the subject premises in favour of the

petitioner-landlord on or before 31.12.2023 subject to payment

of rent @ Rs.2,000/- per month from January to December

2023.

iv) The rent shall be paid to the petitioner on or before

10th of every month. The legal representatives of the

respondent-tenant to file an affidavit within four weeks from

today undertaking that they will hand over the vacant possession

of the subject premises on or before 31.12.2023 and pay the

rent to the petitioner-landlord on or before 10th of every month

@ Rs.2000/- p.m.

v) The respondent is directed to pay arrears of rent @

Rs.1,000/- p.m. from January 2014 till 31.12.2023 within four

weeks from today.

In the event, the legal representatives fail to file an

undertaking and also pay the arrears of rent within four weeks

from today, they are liable to be evicted forthwith.

Sd/-

JUDGE

hr