Kumar, J.

This is the defendant’s second appeal against the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below that the plinth area of the schedule property is more than 14 Sq.Meters and therefore, the Karnataka Rent Act; 1999 is not applicable and hence, the defendant is liable to be ejected from the schedule property.

2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

3. The subject matter of the suit is a shop premises bearing No.6 comprised in Sathyaprakash building/complex bearing K.Ho.4488 and A.R.No.5693, situated at Bus stand road, Hassan City.

4. The plaintiff is the owner of the schedule property. The defendant is a tenant of the schedule premises. A lease deed came to lie entered into between the parties on 1.6.1987. The rent was fixed at Rs.600/-. It was a monthly tenancy. The plaintiff filed HRC No.3 7/1989 under the provisions of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 for eviction of the defendant. In view of Section 31 of the Old Act being restored by virtue of pronouncement of the Supreme Court, he withdrew the said eviction petition. The plaintiff got issued” a legal notice dated 11.9.2000 under Section