G PRAKASH Vs. MYSORE N SHIVARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revisions under Section 50 of the Karnataka rent control Act, 1961 ("the act" for short) are directed agains; the order of eviction granted by the trial judge under the Provisions of Section 21 (1) (h) of the act.

(2.) CERTAIN undisputed facts in these two cases are as follows: respondent-landlord is a reputed doctor settled in usa and has acquired citizenship there. He is a son of a doctor. His father is no more. the suit premises which is situated in the prime locality of Bangalore city at sadashivanagar, consists of ground and first floors which is essentially a residential premises. The landlord's father died about ten years back bequeathing the property in his favour. Both the ground and first floors were allotted to the tenants by the re at controller and the petitioners-tenants came to be in possession of these two premises as tenants and they are residing therefor about a decade. The petitioner in hrrp No. 980 of 1998 is a businessman while the other petitioner in hrrp No. 1026 of 1998 is a senior engineer who is running certain industries. The aged mother of the landlord is staying in a portion of the premises belonging to her at malleswaram and the landlord used to stay in his mother's house during his visits to Bangalore.

(3.) AT certain point of time, before filing of these petitions, the landlord sent certain notices to the tenants expressing his intention to come back to india, stay in the petition premises to pursue his medical avocation at Bangalore, and subsequently he got issued legal notices expressing his intention to start an institution to spread education regarding aids (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) by starting aids research and treatment centre in the schedule premises. He therefore requested the tenant to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the premises in their occupation. Since they did not comply with the request of the landlord, he got filed eviction petitions through his co-brother who is a resident of Bangalore. It is alleged that he is an estate agent and builder at Bangalore. In his petitions filed before the rent court, he pleaded that the premises in question are required for opening aids research and treatment centre; he has established himself at usa treating aids for more than fifteen years; he has earned fame and name for his services to humanity and has decided to come back to india, particularly to Bangalore and start his practice in his own premises and therefore, he requires the petition premises for his bona fide use and occupation. He has stated that he has no other alternative house in city of Bangalore to start this center. He has also stated that he has no other premises to start this institution and therefore, if an order of eviction is not granted he would suffer irreparable loss and injury. However, he has not whispered anything about the hardship that would be caused to the tenants if an order of eviction is granted.