MITHRAVRINDA B S Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue Rule : The writ petition was listed for orders in the morning. But was taken up for hearing with the consent of the Counsel for both sides after 2-30 P.M. The haved Govt. Pleader produced the records for perusal. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, Bangalore (as the appellate authority under the Karnataka Rent Control Act) whereby he rejected the application of the petitioner-landlady for stay of the allotment order made in favour of 3rd respondent, during the pendency of the appeal.

(2.) On the basis of the alleged vecancy report, the Rent Controller notified the premises in question as vacant. The petitioner contended that the premises was not vacant and that she was residing in the house. The Rent Controller relied on the report of the Revenue Inspector to assume that the premises was vacant, consequent on the vacating of premises by the tenant Srikanth. The Rent Controller also states that he held a spot inspection and found the house vacant. Petitioner asserted that she was not aware of the local inspection. It is also seen from the records that no statement of the neighbours was obtained. Petitioner, admittedly is an employee of a Bank at Bangalore. But, no investigation has been made as to where she was staying in case she was not residing in her premises in question. However, the Rent Controller allotted the premises in favour of the 3rd respondent, who is also an employee of another Bank at Bangalore. Against this order, petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy' Commissioner and sought stay of the allotment order. This prayer for stay was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) On 5-5-1987, this Court directed stay of the allotment order. But the 3rd respondent contends that even before the communication of the stay order he took possession of the premises at about 10-15 A.M. on 5-5-1987, undera mahazar prepared by the Revenue I nspector, attested by the Police Constables, an Attendar of H.R.C. and another person from Banashankari. Therefore he contends that writ petition itself has become infructuous.