HARISINGH Vs. ACHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition filed under Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 24-7-1996 in House Rent Case No. 290 of 1993. The revision petitioner is the respondent before the Trial Court, where the respondents herein instituted an eviction petition against the revision petitioner.

(2.) In the said proceedings, the eviction petitioners filed LA. II under Section 29 of the Act praying to direct the revision petitioner to pay arrears of rent of Rs. 29,600/-being the rental arrears according to them from April 1988 till the end of May 1994 at the rate of Rs. 400 per month. The revision petitioner denied that he is due in arrears. According to him, he has paid Rs. 5,000/- under Ex. R-3 cheque.

(3.) It is stated by the revision petitioner that the first respondent is the mother of the second respondent and the second respondent has elder brother by name Balaram. This Balaram was examined by the tenant-revision petitioner as his witness. The said witness was examined-in-chief by the Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. The said witness admitted that the revision petitioner had issued a cheque for Rs. 5,000/- and that amount was withdrawn and the witness had given it to the respondents. He has also admitted that the cheque is Ex. R-3 and it contains his signature as per Ex. R-3(a). Further he stated in answer to a further question that he did not know properly that the marriage of one Ravishankar was performed in September or October 1993. At that stage, the Counsel for the revision petitioner sought permission to treat the witness as hostile and to permit him to cross-examine the said witness. The Trial Court has rejected the said prayer.