C SOMASEKHAR Vs. K R CHOKKALINGA RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are filed by the tenants. The respondent is the landlord. He is a retired official of the State Government. He filed eviction petitions under Section 21-C of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). The said provision was added as an amendment on 20th March 1984. The petitioners filed eviction petitions on 15th April, 1984 enclosing a certificate dated 3rd April 1984 which reads thus:" This is to certify that Sri. K.R. Chokkalinga Raju was working as Deputy Marshal in the Office of the Secretary, Karnataka Legislature Secretariat and retired from service with effect from 31-3-1982 afternoon on attaining the age of superannuation. This certificate is issued to him at his request in terms of Sub-section (i) of Section 21(c) of the Karnataka Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1984 issued in Notification No. LAW 89 LGN 83 dated 20-3-1984. Sd/KRISHNA RAO PAWAR Under Secretary Karnataka Legislature." Thereafter under Section 21-C(a)(i) and (ii) of the Karnataka Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1984, the Under Secretary, Karnataka Legislature issued another certificate dated 9-7-1985 which reads as follows: "This is to certify that Sri. K.R. Chokkalinga Raju was working as Deputy Marshal in the Office of the Secretary, Karnataka Legislature Secretariat and retired from service with effect from 31-3-1982 afternoon on attaining the age of superannuation and further he does not possess any other suitable premises in the local area where he or the members of his family can reside. This Certificate is issued to him in continuation of Certificate already issued in No.20/ LA/LC dated 3-4-1984 at his request in terms of Sub-sections (i) and (ii) of Section 21C(a) of the Karnataka Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1984 issued in Notification No. LAW 89 LGN 83 dated 20-3-1984. Sd/( KRISHNA RAO PAWAR) Under Secretary, Karnataka Legislature." The landlord in his eviction petitions had stated that he needs the premises bona fide and reasonably as accommodation available to him is not sufficient. It is not disputed that the landlord is staying in a portion of this premises. The occupation of Landlord and three tenants is as per sketch Ex.P-7. According to the Commissioner's report which is extracted by the learned Judge in his Judgment at para 11, the accommodation available to the landlord consists of the following One verandah measuring 12' x 6' Room - 9' x 9' another adjacent room 9' x 8' one hall measuring 9' x 9', kitchen 7' x 8', dining hall 8' x 8'. and there is a passage adjacent to the kitchen measuring 3' x 7'.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that there was another tenant by name Madhusudhana Rao and the said Madhusudhana Rao voluntarily vacated the premises. According to Ex.P-1, the accommodation available to Madhusudhana Rao consisted of one hall, one room, verandah, kitchen and bath room. It is pertinent to mention that in between the houses of the landlord and of Madhusudhana Rao, there is an open space. The petitioners-tenants are staying behind the house of Madhusudhana Rao. Learned Counsel appearing for the landlord admitted that after Madhusudhana Rao vacated the premises, he did not report the vacancy to the Rent Controller as required under Section 4 of the Act and occupied the same without obtaining necessary permission from the Rent and Accommodation Controller. In this context, his action is unlawful.

(3.) In the Court below, the tenants contended that petition under Section 21-C was not maintainable. It was also maintained that there are no bonafides in the application and therefore the petitions were liable to be rejected. On the pleas so taken, the Court below raised the following points for determination: 1. Whether petitioner proves that he is entitled for an eviction Order under Section 21(C) of the K.R.C. Act? 2. Whether petitioner further proves that the respondents have created any nuisance and they are liable for eviction under Section 21(1)(d) of K.R.C. Act? 3. Whether greater hardship would be caused by passing the decree than by refusing to pass it?