Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V.SRISHANANDA
Syed Aslam S/o Late Syed Raheem Alias Babu – Appellant
Versus
N.D. Kemparaj S/o Late K.N. Devaraj – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard Sri.Premnath T. N., learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri.Yeshu Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Defendant's revision petition challenging the validity of the order passed in S.C.No.1716/2017 on the file of Small Causes Court, Bengaluru (SCCH-17).
3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:
3.1. A suit came to be filed for the relief of ejectment against the revision petitioner by the respondent by contending that plaintiff is the owner of the ‘B’ schedule property comprising of shop in the ground floor bearing old No.73/17 and New No.17 situated at B. Oosman Khan Road, Bengaluru-560 002 measuring East to West 20 feet and North to South 30 feet (hereinafter referred to as the suit property).
3.2. Plaintiff contended that his father K.N.Devaraj was the owner and later on, plaintiff has become the owner of the suit property and defendant is a tenant in the said property and he failed to pay the rent and there is an arrears and therefore, sought for ejectment.
3.3. Suit was resisted by the defendant by filing detailed written statement by contending that he is not a tenant in the suit pr
A tenant denying a landlord's ownership must vacate the property and pursue separate legal action to establish title, reinforcing the court's ruling that the ejectment suit was valid.
A tenant cannot contest a claimed ownership of a property without vacating it first, establishing a need for civil procedure to resolve ownership disputes.
The court established that mere denial of landlord-tenant relationship by the defendant, without supporting evidence, does not invalidate the plaintiff's claim to ownership and the tenancy rights.
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.
Tenants failed to provide sufficient evidence to contest ownership and tenancy claims, leading to dismissal of revision petitions.
The court affirmed the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship post the landlord's death, emphasizing automatic tenancy transfer to legal heirs and the implications of unpaid rent in ejectment su....
Transferee landlord can evict for personal necessity without attornment; unproven tenant-prior agreement to sell does not end tenancy; revisional court examines only legality, not reappreciates facts....
The court affirmed that a tenant must vacate premises and establish rights after denying the landlord-tenant relationship, reinforcing the importance of valid tenancy evidence in ejectment suits.
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
