R SANDHYARANI Vs. M MYLARAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order of dismissal of the eviction petition filed by her in H.R.C. 904/01 on the file of the XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore, whereby the trial court dismissed the eviction petition filed by her against the respondent Mylarappa under Section 27(2)(a) and (r) of the Karnataka Rent Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner stated to be the absolute owner of the petition schedule premises and the respondent is her tenant as per rental agreement dated 7.6.1999. THE rent was Rs. 500/- per month for a period of two years from 7.6.1999 and thereafter the rent was enhanced to Rs. 2000/- per month. THE case of the petitioner is that her family consists of six members including her husband, three daughters and son. THE present premises in occupation of the petitioner is an old building, hence the petitioner is intending to shift her family to the petition schedule premises. Since the respondent is a chronic defaulter in payment of rents, a legal notice was issued, the same was returned unclaimed. However the certificate of posting was duly served on the respondent for which he has sent untenable reply. THErefore, the petitioner filed H.R.C. 904/2001. THE trial court after recording the evidence and after hearing counsel appearing for both parties directed the parties to approach competent court of civil jurisdiction for declaration of their rights. THErefore, the petitioner has come up in this revision petition.

(3.) ON the other hand the learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that Hanumanthappa was the owner of the premises and he executed a power of attorney in favour of the respondent Mylarappa on 10.4.1987. Hanumanthappa died on 5.8.1987. Therefore, even if any power of attorney executed in favour of Mylarappa he has no right or title to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner herein after the death of said Hanumanthappa. Therefore, as soon as the power of attorney dies, even if it is an irrevocable power of attorney, and any sale of the properly by him becomes void sale. Therefore, any rent agreement and resale agreement obtained by threat, coercion and fraud is void. Therefore the trial court has rightly held that there is no landlord and tenant relationship between the petitioner and the respondent. Further there is dispute with regard to the title of the property. Hence prays for dismissal of this revision petition.