Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.P. SANDESH, J
Shashikala Shetty D/O Late Narayana Shetty – Appellant
Versus
Meenakshi Rai Since Deceased By Her Legal Representatives – Respondent
ORDER :
H.P. Sandesh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for caveator-respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. These two revision petitions are filed by the petitioners-respondent Nos.2, 3(a) to 3(c) and 4 to 7 before the Trial Court praying to set aside the order 03.08.2021 passed in H.R.C.No.3/2013 by the learned III Additional Civil Judge, Mangaluru, D.K. and the order dated 05.04.2024 passed in Rev. (Rent) Nos.14/2021 and 10/2021 by the learned IV Additional District Judge and Commercial Court, D.K. Mangaluru.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the petitioners before the Trial Court is that while seeking the relief of eviction, invoked the provisions of Section 27 (2)(r) and 31(1)(a) read with Section 5 of the KARNATAKA RENT ACT , 1999 directing the respondents to vacate and surrender the vacant possession of petition premises to the petitioners. The petition property is a non-agricultural immovable property residential building bearing Door No.4-1-77, R.S.No.394, T.S.No.227, East Southern portion measuring 0-10 cents situated in Kodialbail Village and Ward, Mangaluru Taluk within the Mangalore City Corporation and within the registration Sub-District of Mangalo
Tenancy rights under Section 5 of the Karnataka Rent Act are inheritable only for five years post-death, and failure to pay rent for five years constitutes grounds for eviction.
It is well settled that rights of parties will have to be determined on basis of rights available to them on date of suit.
It is settled law that, if no document evidencing fact of tenancy is given and if it is an oral tenancy, same has to be considered on merits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that tenants dispossessed pursuant to a decree, which was subsequently reversed, have an absolute right to reclaim possession, and their registrati....
The appellate court must provide detailed reasoning for its decisions, reflecting a conscious application of mind to all issues, while the revisional jurisdiction does not allow for a re-hearing of f....
The court ruled that acknowledgment of rent exceeding statutory thresholds affirms jurisdiction under the Transfer of Property Act, negating claims under the Karnataka Rent Act.
The rights of statutory tenants under the DRC Act are confined to specific heirs designated by law, preventing broader claims to tenancy inheritance.
The court established that tenancy rights under the 1956 Act were not extinguished by the 1997 Act, emphasizing the necessity of clear admissions for eviction under CPC.
The heritable rights of the statutory tenant are governed by the provisions of Section 2(l) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, and the rights in the tenanted property can only flow in favor of heirs as p....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
