Misc.Cvl. 9339/2010 is filed under Section 45(4) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, praying to stop all further proceedings in the above case.

ORDERS ON MISC.CVL.9339/2010 AND MISC.CVL.9338/2010

1. These applications have been filed by the landlord under Section 45 (4) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act of 1999’ for short) to stop all further proceedings and to make an order directing to put the landlord in possession of the premises or dismiss the revision petitions.

2. The facts relevant for the purpose of these applications are as under:

The applicant herein is the landlord and is respondent in these revision petitions, whereas the opponent in these petitions is the tenant in possession of the petition premises and has filed these revision petitions against the eviction decrees passed in HRC Nos.560/1999 and 564/1999 vide order dated 15-04-2004 under Section 5 of the Act of 1999 by the Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court.

3. I will be referring to the parties as landlord and tenant for the purpose of convenience.

4. The landlord filed HRC Nos.560/1999 and 564/1999 seeking eviction of the tenant of the ground under Section 21 (1) (h) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act of 1961’ for short) against the tenant in the Court below. The Trial Court after adopting all the formalities, completed the enquiry and after hearing the counsel for both the parties and on appreciation of the material on record granted a decree of eviction under Section 5 of the Act of 1999 and aggrieved by the order of eviction, the tenant has approached this Court by filing these revision petitions.

5. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Trial Court, the Act of 1961 was repealed and the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 came into force with effect from 5.12.2001. As the provisions of the new Act were applicable to the premises in question, situated at Mission Road, Bangalore, the proceedings were continued before the Trial Court and the request of the landlord on the application under Section 21 (1) (h) and (j) of the Act of 1961, was considered under Section 27(2) (r) of the Act of 1999 and the relief sought on that ground was dismissed and the order came to be passed under Section 5 of the Act of 1999. This order has been challenged by the tenant in these revision petitions filed under Section 46 (1) of the Act of 1999.

6. During the pendency of these revision petitions, the landlord/respondent herein has filed these applications under Section 45 (4) of the Act of 1999 and in support of these applications in both the cases, affidavits have been filed, wherein the landlord states that the rent of the premises at Rs.50/- p.m. in HRRP No.469/2004 and Rs.32/-in HRRP No.510/2004 was neither deposited nor paid and that in the first revision petition, the rent for 23 months amounting to Rs.1150/-is due and in the second petition, the rent for 38 months amounting to Rs.1216/-is due and that the tenant has committed default in the matter of payment of rent promptly and has not deposited the same. He also states that the tenant has no cause to withhold the payment or deposit of the rent and that therefore, the further proceedings in these revision petitions are liable to be stopped.

7. The tenant has filed the statement of objections denying the allegations made and states that he had paid the upto date rent and in HRRP No.469/2004, a money order for Rs.1,200/- converting the rent from July 2006 to June 2008 was sent on 19.7.2007 and the said money order was refused by the landlord. Again on 12.9.2008, he once again sent the money order for a sum of Rs.1,800/-covering the rent from July 2006 to June 2009 and the same was refused. Finally, a sum of Rs.2,400/-was sent by money order dated 7.8.2009 covering the rent from July 2006 to June 2010 and the same has been accepted by the landlord. In these circumstances, he has sought for the rejection of the application filed in