NARAYANSA Vs. MEERABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is filed by the first defendant in O. S. No. 269/ 2002 on the file of the prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) Gadag, being aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 6-3-2004 in r. A. No. 141/2003 confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 29-10-2003 passed by the Trial court in the suit.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 to 4 herein were the plaintiffs and the Appellant was the first defendant in the trial Court. The other respondents were the defendants. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties is referred to as in the original suit.

(3.) THE Plaintiffs filed the suit for eviction of the defendants and for possession of the suit schedule property. According to the plaintiffs, the property in question was taken by one hanamantasa Yellosa Siddling on yearly rent for business purpose after his death the defendants continued the business in the schedule premises. It is stated that since eviction proceedings initiated for their eviction culminated in abatement of proceedings on account of repeal of karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 and Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 was enacted. The suit was resisted by the defendants by filing written statement admitting the inherited tenancy and questioning the locus standi of the plaintiffs. A stand is taken that in view of the compromise decree in L. C. No. 178/65 between the previous owner and original tenant, plaintiffs can claim only rent and they cannot seek for eviction. On the basis of the pleadings, the trial Court framed issues and went for trial. Parties adduced evidence and produced documents in support of their respective case. Upon consideration of the material brought on record, the trial Court decreed the suit evicting the defendants by granting three months time. The appeal preferred against the judgment and decree of the trial Court was also dismissed by the first Appellate Court confirming the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. Being aggrieved, by the same, the present second appeal is filed.