H HANUMANTHAPPA Vs. M KRISHNAMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) these revision petitions arise out of proceeding initiated by landlord under clauses (h) and (p) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 read with Section 21-a of the Karnataka rent control ACT numbered as hrc 1758 of 1983 wherein the trial court negatived the reliefs under clause (h) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the ACT read with Section 21-a of the ACT sought by the landlord and allowed the relief sought for under clause (p) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the act. Aggrieved by the Order, both the tenant and as well as the landlord have preferred these revision petitions.

(2.) crp 3571 of 1988 is filed by the tenant aggrieved by the Order passed under clause (p) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the act. Crp 4860 of 1988 is relied against the Order passed under clause (h) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the act. One of the questions raised by the tenants relates to interpretation of clause (p) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the ACT (of part v).

(3.) section 21. Notwith standing anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract no Order or decree for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made by any court or other authority in favour of the landlord against the tenant. Provided that the court may on an application made to it make an Order for the recovery of possession of a premises on one or more of the following grounds only namely clause (p) reads: