B. PRASAD AND ORS. Vs. P.S. UDAYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenants' revision petition directed against order dated 30-8-2014 passed in H.R.C. No. 10005 of 2013 by V Additional Small Cause Judge, Bangalore allowing the petition filed under Section 27(2)(r) of Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 and directing the revision petitioners herein to quit, deliver and hand over vacant possession of petition schedule premises to respondent-landlord by granting 60 days time from the date of order. Learned Counsel appearing for revision petitioners after arguing the matter for sometime had sought for reasonable time to vacate petition schedule premises. To enable the learned Counsel to file necessary affidavit in that regard matter came to be adjourned to 4-12-2014. On the next date of hearing i.e., 5-12-2014 affidavit of undertaking came to be filed by the revision petitioners and same placed on record. It was noticed that revision petitioners were not present before Court in person. Hence, to ascertain as to whether said affidavit of undertaking has been filed by the revision petitioners voluntarily without any force, threat or coercion, a learned Member of Bangalore Bar was appointed as Court Commissioner namely Ms. Musrath Tabassum, Advocate since learned Counsel submitted that both the petitioners are not keeping good health and pleaded their inability to be present in person. She has filed a report and same is placed on record.

(2.) Perusal of the Court Commissioner's report would indicate that she has visited the house of petitioners/deponents at 11 a.m. on 7-12-2014 and enquired with the petitioners regarding affidavit of undertaking filed by them. They have admitted execution of undertaking filed before this Court on 5-12-2014 before the Court Commissioner.

(3.) In the light of the report filed by Court Commissioner, I am of the considered view affidavit of undertaking filed by the revision petitioners deserves to be accepted and accordingly accepting the same, I proceed to pass the following: