BHAGIRATHI BAJ Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this matter is taken up for final disposal it self having regard to the age of the proceedings.

(2.) in the year 1983, certain complaints were lodged with the authorities stating that the premises in question has become vacant. On this the petitioner who is the owner of lie premises was directed to report vacancy. This was challenged by the petitioner by filing writ petition No. 9792/1984. This writ petition was dismissed on the ground that there was no final order. At the same lime, a notification was issued for allotment of the premises on 24th april, 1984 and the premises in question was allotted in favour of the 3rd respondent herein on 2slh august, 1987. The petitioner challenged this order by filing an appeal before the deputy commissioner (the first respondent herein).

(3.) according to the petitioner, the premises in question is not covered by part-iiof the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, because it is a new construction and that part-ii is attracted only to a building which completes 5 years from the dale of construction as per Section 2(2) of ihc act. It may be noticed here that this plea as to the age of the prcm ises was ra ised by the petitioner in the very beginning.