The automatic attornment of tenancy upon property sale establishes the landlord-tenant relationship, justifying eviction for unpaid rent under the Karnataka Rent Act.

ORDER :

V SRISHANANDA, J.

The present revision petition is filed by the tenant challenging the orders passed by the Rent Court as well as the Revisional Court, directing the revision petitioner to vacate and hand over the petition premises, which is described hereunder within three months from the date of order passed by the Trial Court, which was confirmed by the order of the Revisional Court:

"Schedule

A Mangalore tiled residential house extent: 35' x 35' situated in Mandya City Ashoka Nagar, Jains colony opp. PWD Engineers Club, bearing Khatha No.D5/605/1410 Site Extent East-West : 90 feet, North-South : 40 feet, bounded by : East - by road, West : Lakshmamma W/o Late Krishnappa's house, North : Property of G.Puttaswamy, South by - Road."

2. Facts in brief, which are utmost necessary for the disposal of the present petition, are as under:

An eviction petition came to be filed by the respondent under Section 27(2)(a) and (r) of the KARNATAKA RENT ACT , 1999, contending that, the petitioner is the absolute owner of the petition schedule property, having purchased the same on 01.07.1978 from erstwhile owner Smt. Siddamma W/o S.K.Muddaveerashetty through a registered sale deed. At the time of purchase, the father of the respondents namely, Thammaiah was alive and he was residing in the schedule property as tenant. After the purchase, there was an automatic attornment of the tenency.

3. A suit came to be filed in OS No.626/1989 on the file of Principal Munsiff at Maddur for partition against the coparceners and the purchaser of the suit property. Petitioner was defendant No.7 in the said suit and petition schedule property was the 1^st item of the suit properties in the said suit.

4. Said suit, on contest, came to be decreed, except for the petition property and items No.2, 22 and 23 of the suit properties, against which an appeal in RA No.69/1999 was filed. The appeal got dismissed. There was a second appeal filed, which also came to be dismissed and therefore, petitioner became the absolute owner in respect of petition property.

5. Initially, the rate of rent was Rs.50/- per month in the year 1978, which was periodically enhanced and in the year 2004, the rent was paid at the rate of Rs.200/- month. On and from 01.07.2007, the rent was enhanced to Rs.300/- per month and later on and from 01.07.2010, the rent was enhanced to Rs.400/- per month and lastly, it was enhanced to Rs.500/- per month on and from 01.07.2016.

6. The respondent did not pay the water bill and there was a demand notice issued to the petitioner to pay the arrears. The petition property was sought to be used for bonafide use and occupation and also on the ground arrears of rent, eviction petition was filed.

7. After service of notice of the eviction, the tenant appeared before the Court and filed detailed written objections, denying the entire petition averments contending that the petition is not maintainable and the petitioner has approached the Court with false and incorrect facts.

8. The petition, on contest, came to be allowed by the learned Trial Judge. Operative portion of the order of the learned Trial Judge reads as under:

"ORDER

The petition filed by the Petitioner Under Section 27 (2) (a) (e) (r) and Section 31 of the KARNATAKA RENT ACT 1999 is hereby allowed with costs.

The respondents are hereby directed to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of petition schedule property within 3 months from the date of this order to the petitioner. Failing which, the Petitioner is at liberty to get the vacant possession of petition schedul