LAWS(KAR)-1981-12-9

M K ANJANEYASWAMY Vs. C NARAYANASWAMY

Decided On December 11, 1981
M.K.ANJANEYASWAMY Appellant
V/S
C.NARAYANASWAMY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the stage of admission, the respondent has entered caveat, therefore the matter is taken up for final hearing itself.

(2.) This civil revision petition is preferred against the order dated 30th September 1981 passed by the learned Prl. Munsiff, Kolar, in Exn. No. 142 of 1981 over-ruling the objection raised by the petitioner judgment debtor and directing that the execution be proceeded with.

(3.) One and the only contention of Sri R. Nagaraj, learned counsel for the patitioner judgment debtor is that the order of eviction which is passed on the basis of the compromise is null and void in as much as the Court has not, in express terms, while recording the compromise, recorded a finding that it is satisfied that any one or more of the grounds pleaded for eviction as per the provisions contained in the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, under S. 21 (1) (d), (h) and (o) have been established. This contention cannot at all be accepted. It is already pointed out that the Executing Court has over-ruled the objections and has directed the execution to proceed. 3. 2. It was not disputed that the petitioner was the tenant of the suit premises in question and the respondent was the owner/landlord thereof. The respondent landlord had filed HRC 31 of 1976 in the Court of the Munsiff, Kolar, for eviction of the petitioner not only on the ground that the suit premises was required for his bona fide use and occupation but also on the grounds falling under S. 21 (1) (d) and (o) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the first round of litigation, the Court of first instance dismissed the petition and there was an appeal to the District Court which was also dismissed. Then, CRP 2891 of 1978 was preferred before this Court challenging the correctness of the order passed by the District Court confirming the order passed by the Court of first instance. This Court allowed the revision petition and remitted the case to the Court of first instance for fresh consideration. After the remand, the parties have filed the compromise petition which reads as follows :