LAWS(KAR)-2001-6-2

T S PRAMEELA Vs. BALAKBISHNA

Decided On June 13, 2001
T.S.PRAMEELA Appellant
V/S
BALAKBISHNA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is filed against the order passed on la. No. I in ex. case No. 3299 of 1996 on the file of 2nd additional small cause judge, Bangalore. The appellant is the objector in the execution case filed an application under order 21, Rule 98 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code read with Rule 35 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act objecting the execution of the delivery warrant in respect of the petition property.

(2.) THE background of the case leading to the present appeal are stated thus: the appellant is the daughter of one ramaiah setty. The said ramaiah setty had a wife by name padmavathamma. According to the appellant the petition property was gifted to her orally by her father for arisina kunkuma. Ramaiah setty had no male heirs and he died in the year 1972. By virtue of the said oral gift, the appellant claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the property. Further it was contended before the trial court in the application that one subbaiah setty was inducted as a tenant by the appellant and he vacated the premises. Thereafter, appellant is in continued possession and enjoyment of the petition property.

(3.) THE first respondent in the appeal claims that the petition property was gifted by registered deed in favour of his wife padmavathamma from whom the first respondent purchased the property under registered sale deed. After the purchase of the property, it is said that the tenancy in favour of subbaiah setty was attorned in favour of the first respondent and he filed h. r. c. Case in 1479 of 1993 seeking eviction of subbaiah setty who is the 2nd respondent. The petition came to be allowed directing the eviction of the 2nd respondent. Pursuant to the said Order, the present execution proceedings are initiated securing the eviction and delivery of possession.