THILOTHAMMA Vs. RAHMATHUNNISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision by the tenants under Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent control Act, 1961 is preferred against the order dated 19-1-2000 passed in H. R. C. No. 10484 of 1999 on the file of XV Additional Small Causes judge, Bangalore.

(2.) THE respondent-landlord filed the petition for eviction of the tenants under Section 21 (l) (f) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (Karnataka Act 22 of 1961 ). She put forth the case in the eviction petition that the husband of the first petitioner, one S. M. A. Hameed was a tenant in a portion of premises bearing No. 4, Mosque Road, Frazer town, Bangalore, and subsequent to his death the first petitioner continued in occupation of the premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 95/- excluding light and water charges. It is the case of the respondent that the premises is in a dilapidated condition and it is required to be demolished and reconstructed. The respondent claimed to have sufficient funds at her disposal for putting up a new construction. It is further her case that the first petitioner has sub-let the premises to the second petitioner who is her son-in-law. Based on these two grounds she claimed that she is entitled to get possession of the petition premises.

(3.) THE petitioners denied the petition averments and filed the statement of objections disputing the claim of the respondent that she had sufficient means to put up a construction after demolition. They also denied that the second petitioner is a sub-tenant of the premises. It is their stand that the second petitioner is the son-in-law of the first petitioner and he has been staying along with the first petitioner (mother-in-law) even before the demise of the original tenant Prof. Hameed.