MURALIDHARA Vs. B R SESHADRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this H. R. C. revision petition filed by the petitioner-tenant under Section 50 (1) of the karnataka Rent Control Act against the first respondent landlord and the second respondent rent collector, the petitioner tenant has prayed that the order dated 25. 7. 1992 passed by the H. R. C. judge in H. R. C. No. 1460/1988 stopping further proceedings and holding that the cause shown by the tenant was unsatisfactory and directing the tenant to handover possession of the petition schedule premises to the landlord be set aside.

(2.) COMING to the order challenged dated 25. 7. 1992, it is necessary to state some developments in this case. The impugned order was challenged by the tenant before this Court in C. R. P. No. 3818/1992. This Court by its order dated 23. 9. 1992 dismissed the revision petition filed by the tenant. The tenant filed Civil Appeal No. 5406/1993 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 2479/1993 ). The hon'ble Supreme Court, by its order dated 11. 10. 1993, set aside the order passed by this Court on 23. 9. 1992 and remitted the matter back to this Court for reconsideration and for passing appropriate order. This is how we come back to the impugned order dated 25. 7. 1992.

(3.) TO repeat, the order passed by the H. R. C. judge on 25. 7. 1992 was confirmed by this Court on 23. 9. 1992 in C. R. P. No. 3818/1992. The tenant took up the matter to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by its order dated 11. 10. 1993, was pleased to set aside the order passed by this Court and remanded the matter for reconsideration and to pass appropriate order.