1. This revision petition is filed against order of eviction made in S.C.No. 1292/2011 dated 08.11.2011. I have heard Sri. S. Shaker Shetty, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri. Sangamesh R.B., learned counsel for respondent.

2. Sri. S. Shaker Shetty, learned counsel for petitioner/tenant has made following submissions:

I The plinth area of schedule premises (commercial premises) is less than 14 Sq.mts., and provisions of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 are applicable. Therefore, the respondent/landlord should have filed an eviction petition under provisions of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999. The trial court should not have passed eviction order under provisions of the Small Causes Court Act.

II The respondent has not stated about the security deposit and goodwill, which will be refunded at the time of termination of tenancy.

III The tenancy has not been properly terminated.

3. The learned counsel for respondent/landlord has made following submissions:

I The suit was filed before the City Civil Court in O.S. No. 8910/2007 pursuant to the order made by this court in CRP 46/2007 dated 01.10.2007. In view of full bench judgment of this court reported in ILR 2011 KAR 229 (in the case of A