K GANESH SHET Vs. A K JAYARAMA SHEKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Proceedings for eviction of tenant on the ground available under Section 21(1)(f) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter, the Act for short) were initiated. The Trial Court dismissed the claim for eviction. The landlord preferred revision before the Court of District Judge which was allowed and the tenant and the sub-tenants were directed to be evicted. The two sub-tenants preferred revisions in the High Court. The High Court has upheld the finding of fact recorded by the District Judge that the premises were sub-let without the consent of the landlord. However, still the High Court has granted relief to the sub-tenants and denied relief of eviction to the landlord. The High Court has formed an opinion that in spite of the sub-tenants having been illegally inducted into the premises, the original tenant had died and the sub-tenants were holding under the legal representatives of the original tenant and the sub-tenants deserved to be shown mercy. The High Court directed the rent which was being paid by the sub-tenants at the rate of Rs. 600/- per month to be enhanced to Rs. 1000/- per month and that too directly to the landlord bypassing the tenant and having done so directed the claim for eviction to be dismissed. Consequently, these two appeals by special leave have been filed by the landlord.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties we are satisfied that the judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained.

(3.) During the pendency of these appeals, the Act of 1961 has been repealed and replaced by the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1999 with effect from 31-12-1999. Dealing with Section 70 of the New Act we have today held in M/s. Mahendra Saree Emporium v. G.V. Srinivasa Murthy (Civil Appeal No. 6296 of 1998 decided on August 27, 2004) that these appeals shall not abate and shall be heard and decided as if the 1999 Act was not passed.