SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Kar) 228

A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA
Dileep Kumar Mishra – Appellant
Versus
T. M. Vinay – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Sri. H.J. Sanghvi, Advocate.
Sri. R.B. Sadashivappa, Advocate.

ORDER

1. Common order on the revision petitions regarding admission.

2. These three revision petitions filed under Section 46(1) of Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 have arisen out of final orders passed by the Chief Judge in Eviction Petition in HRC Nos. 107/2013, 108/2013 and 109/2013. All these petitions have been disposed of on 15.10.2015 by separate considered orders.

3. The revision petitioners were respondents in all these three eviction petitions filed under Section 27(2)(r) of Karnataka Rent Act, 1999. In the case, bearing No. 107/2013 Section 5 of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, has also been revoked by the petitioner therein.

4. Perused the impugned orders passed in HRC Nos. 107 to 109/2013 and heard the learned counsel representing the revision petitioners in all these cases.

5. Schedule property in HRC No. 107/2013 is described as residential premises in fourth floor of property bearing No.4 (New No.4/11), situated at 2nd Cross, Belli Basavanna Temple Street, Mamulpet, Bangalore consists of one hall, one kitchen with toilet-cum-bathroom. Schedule property mentioned in HRC No. 108/2013 is the adjacent residential premises, consists of one hall, one room, kitchen, one pooja room w




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top