ABDUL HAQ Vs. MAHBOOB KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Civil Revision Petitions are by tenants and arise out of the common order of eviction dated 30.7.1983 passed by the IInd Additional Small Causes Judge, Bangalore City in H.R.C. Nos. 2639, 2643, 2640, 2638, 2645, 2642 and 2641 of 1980, respectively. All these seven H.R.C. cases were clubbed together and evidence common to them all was recorded in H.R.C. No. 2638/80.

(2.) SEVEN small bunk-constructed with Thattis and Zincsheets in an area of land measuring 52ft x 25ft situate at B. Osman Khan Road, Bangalore City, belonging to the respondent, wherein the tenants-petitioners are carrying on business in scrap iron or used automobile spare parts or both, are the subject of these proceedings. The respondent has sought for their eviction on various grounds. Firstly, on the grounds mentioned in clauses (h) and (j) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, stating that he and his brothers including Rehman Khan are presently residing in the house of their sister and there being 15 members in the family, the accommodation was insufficient and that he therefore, reasonably and bonafide required the premises in occupation of the tenants for construction of shop premises in the ground floor and residential house on the first floor and since Rehman Khan has no independent source of income to support himself and his wife, after his marriage, the shops proposed to be constructed are also required by him for carrying on family business or scrap iron. In addition, he also contended that the tenants in C.R.P. Nos. 28, 29 and 30 of 1984, namely, S. Abdul Haq, Syed Ahmed and J.M. Patcha Sahib, have unlawfully sub-let the bunk shops in their occupation to Ameerjan, Abdul Hakeem and Noor respectively on higher rents and making gains for themselves and they are therefore liable to be evicted under clause (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Act. The tenants Syed Ahmed and Patcha Sahib (petitioners in CRP Nos. 29 and 30 of 1984) had not only committed default in payment of rent and failed to pay the arrears of rent inspite of demands, but Patcha Sahib has acquired by purchasing premises bearing No. 22 (Old No. 2-A) at Motinagar and reconstructed it with a shop on the ground floor and a residential house on the first floor and has also been carrying on scrap iron business there. The tenant Syed Ahmed has also reconstructed premises at No. 44, with two shops on the ground-floor and a residential house on the first floor; the shops so constructed by them were also ideally suitable for their business and they are therefore liable to be evicted both under clause (a) and clause (p) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Act. Similarly, he contended, the tenant Anwar Pasha (petitioner in CRP. No. 155/84) owns premises bearing No. 8 (old No. 6/1) situate on Susheela Road, Doddamavalli, Bangalore, and has reconstructed two shops and let out the shops to S.N. Engineering Works and he has also besides acquired premises No. 8(21/A) in Thayappa Layout, J.C. Road, Bangalore, and constructed it with a residential house. Hence, he is liable to be evicted under clause (p) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Act.

(3.) THE landlord examined himself during the course or enquiry as PW-1 and his brother Rehman Khan as PW-2 in support of his contentions and has produced various documents including lease-deeds (Exs. P-2 to P-9), sanctioned plan and licences (Exs. P. 29 and 30) and certified extract from the property Register (Exs. P-33, 34, 37 and 39) in support of his case. The tenants have also examined themselves and one Murthuza as RW-8.