QUIET CORNER INDIA Vs. HAMEEDULLA KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS common questions of law and facts are involved in these revision petitions, they are taken up together for disposal.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience the parties in these petitions will be referred to in the course of this order by their rank and position before the court-below.

(3.) THE petitioners Habidulla Khan and Najiba Khanum purchased the petition schedule property from the previous owners Edmund Joseph and Evelyn Joseph. Subsequent to the said purchase, the khata of the said property was transferred to the petitioners name and they are also paying corporation taxes thereon. The petition premises consisted of two portions viz. a garage portion and a residential portion. Respondent-Quiet Corner India was the tenant in respect of the garage portion and Abraham was the tenant in respect of the residential portion of the premises. The petitioners filed eviction petitions against the respective tenants in respect of both portions. HRC 10277/96 was filed under 21 (1) (a), (h) and (p) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (the repealed Act for short) against the tenant of the garage portion and HRC 10277/2002 was filed under Sec. 21 (1) and (h) of the Act in respect of the residential portion. The court-below tried the eviction petitions separately and passed separate orders. In H. R. C. No. 10277/96 the court-below allowed the eviction petition under Clauses (a) and (r) of Sec 27 (2) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (the present Act for Short) as by then it had come into force. In HRI No. 10276/96 the Court-below allow the eviction petition under. Sec. 21 (1) (h) of the repealed Act but dismissed the petition under Sec. 21 (1) (p) of the Act. HRRP 410/2000 is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the dismissal of their petition under Sec. 21 (1) (p) of the present Act.