UNION OF INDIA Vs. SRINIVASA RAO SHIVARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Rent Controller, Dharwad, in No. RNT, SR. 182/78-79, dated 10-10-1979 ordering under S. 21A (1) (c) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1976, that the present writ petitioners shall vacate and hand over possession of the suit premises to the landlord who is arrayed as respondent-1 in the writ petition giving a period of six months to vacate.

(2.) Present respondent-1 purchased the suit premises from its original owner on 22-6-1978. Earlier, the suit premises were held by the writ petitioners, on lease from the original owner Present respondent-1 in the writ petition was in occupation of the building belonging to one Deshpande, who instituted a petition after the coming into force of Act No. 66 of 1976 for regularisation of tenancy in favour of present respondent-1 under S. 31B of the Amended Act and the proceedings ended in favour of the landlord regularising the tenancy in favour of respondent-1. Thereafter when the present landlord, viz , respondent-1 in the writ petition, purchased the building, he applied to the Rent Controller under S. 21-A of the Karnataka Pent Control Act, 1976, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) that he must be given possession by summary eviction of the present writ petitioner of the suit premises which he purchased on 22-6-1978. It is in that proceeding that the Rent Controller has ordered eviction of the present writ petitioner under S. 21A (1) (c) of the Act and that . order is challenged in this writ petition before me.

(3.) The learned Advocate appearing for the writ petitioners vehemently contended that the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of S. 21A (1) (c) of the Act. According to him, present respondent-1 fell within the provisions contained in S. 21A (2) ( f the Act, and, hence, he submitted that the order passed by the Rent Controller is illegal, arbitrary and capricious and, hence, he prayed that the same should be quashed