CHENNACHARI Vs. S SAROJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition at the instance of the tenant who though survived an eviction petition that had been filed by the landlord as against him invoking the provisions of provisos (a), (b), (c) and (f)to Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 [for short '1961 Act'] was stumped by an order passed by the revisional court exercising jurisdiction under Section 5 (1) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 [for short '1999 Act'] in terms of the Order dated 22-9-2003 impugned in this writ petition and who had been directed to vacate and hand over the premises in question, are before this Court questioning the competence and the jurisdiction of the revisional court to pass an order of this nature.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the above petition not in dispute are that the father of the petitioners was a tenant under the father of the respondents in respect of the premises bearing No. 1131/11, f-20, situated at Manandavadi Road, Mysore measuring an extent of 40ft. , x 120 ft. , which was being used by the tenant to run a timber depot in the premises. The premises in question had been leased as a vacant land. It is in respect of such premises the landlord had filed an eviction petitioner under the provisions referred to above under the 1961 Act, the provisions being one which enabled the landlord to seek eviction of a tenant for the reason that the tenant was in arrears of rent; that the tenant erected permanent structure on the premises without the permission of the landlord; that the tenant has unlawfully sublet the premises etc. The trial court, i. e. , the court to which the eviction petition presented under the provisions of the 1961 Act, in terms of Order dated 23-6-1995 passed in HRC No. 294/1989 dismissed the petition negativing the grounds urged by the petitioners for seeking eviction.

(3.) ONE development was that the landlord had died and his legal heirs had pursued the eviction petition even before the trial Court. The legal heirs preferred a revision petition under Section 50 of the 1961 Act in RR No. 68/1996 before the court of II Addl. District Judge, Mysore. During the pendency of this revision petition, two things happened. One is that the tenant died on 18-2-1997 and the other is that the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 also died, in the sense, it was repealed and succeeded by the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999. After the death of the respondent-tenant in the rent revision petition, legal heirs of the tenant had been brought on record in place of the deceased tenant. The Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 came into force with effect from 31-12-2001. It was after these two events that the revision petitioners came up with an application under Section 5 of the 1999 Act contending that the premises in question is required to be vacated and handed over to the petitioners, in asmuch as, the period of five years had elapsed after the death of the tenant and the respondents were no more the tenants of the premises after the expiry of the period of five years from the date of the death of the original tenant though they were the legal heirs of the original tenant.