A R OOMAR SAIT Vs. B S RAJANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed by the revision petitioners -landlords against the order on LA. No. 6, dated 26. 07. 2006 passed by the VII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, (SCCH-3) in HRC No. 486/2005, whereby the Trial Court allowed the application-I. A. No. 6 filed by the respondent under section 43 (2) (b)of the Karnataka Rent Act read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure code.

(2.) THE main grounds urged by the revision petitioners are that the Trial Court erred in holding that since agreement of sale is executed between the revision petitioners and the respondent in respect of purchase of petition schedule property, the earlier possession of tenant is deemed to be terminated; that the agreement of sale is barred by limitation and the agreement came to be cancelled much earlier and there was no suit pending for enforcement of the contract even on the date of HRC petition; that the Trial Court has not properly appreciated in holding that if the respondent has failed in complying with any terms of the agreement his possession will become unlawful possession and in that event revision petitioners have to approach the Civil Court to recover the possession. Hence, this revision.

(3.) I have heard the arguments of the Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Learned Counsel for the respondent and perused the material placed on record.