C K MOHAMMED KUNHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have prayed for striking down Sec. 31 of the Karnataka RentControl Act ('the Act' for short) as unconstitutional. This relief stands concluded by the pronouncement of an order by this Court in H. PADMANABHA RAO v STATE OF KARNATAKA 1987(1) Kar.LJ. 176 (DB) : ILR 1986(3) Kar.2480). This Court has held that Sec.31 of the Act is liable to be struck down on the ground that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The main reason given by their lordships as follows:

(2.) In view of this, it is clear that the declaration is only prospective and not retrospective. It does not affect the decrees or orders passed earlier to the declaration. Therefore, the second relief asked for by the petitioner, namely, to declare the decree dated 9th April 1979 in O.S. 103/73 and the decree dated 8th April 1979 in O.S. No. 104/73 remain unaffected by the said declaration and it is not possible to grant a declaration that they are invalid or bad in law. Therefore, the second relief is rejected. Accordingly, the writ Petitions are dismissed, No costs.

(3.) Mr. D.R. Rajasekharappa, HCGP, is permitted to file his memo of appearance for respondents-1 and 6 within six weeks from today. Writ Petition dismissed.