The main legal principle established is that the provisions of the Rent Control Act can override any condition in a lease providing a ground for eviction, and the Act's grounds for eviction take precedence over contractual terms.

1. The question that directly falls for consideration in this appeal is whether or not, a petition under S.21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, for eviction of a tenant under a contractual fixed term lease, would be maintainable on the ground of reasonable and bona fide requirement of the landlord. On certain occasions earlier, the question has been considered by this Court as well as High Courts including full Benches of the Karnataka High Court but there does not seem to be a cohesion of views.

2. The brief factual background giving rise to the point is that in the year 1905, the mother and guardian of one Gurappa Channabasappa Belaguri, holding a power of attorney, leased out his non-agricultural land to Anant Parashuram Nagaonkar for a period of 99 years, to establish a factory. In the year 1907, the lessee Nagaonkar aforesaid, assigned the lease in favour of Ramdas Vithaldas Darbar for a sum of Rs. 8,500/-. The original parties to the agreements have all died and their heirs stepped into their shoes and they are parties to the present proceedings.

3. In the year 1986 the lessors served a notice to the lessees calling upon them to vacate the premises on the ground that the lessees did not pay rents for the period 1.3.85 to 31.3.86 and that the property was also bona fide required for their occupation. Reply to the notice said to have been sent by the lessees denying default in payment as alleged and asserted inter alia that the lessors had no right to terminate the lease in view of the 99 years' fixed term lease under the agreement. Thereafter, however, the lessors filed an application under S.21(1)(h) and 21(1)(p) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 on the ground that the premises were bona fide required by them for starting their own business.

4. The lessees contested the petition on the ground that the fixed term lease was subsisting which expires only on 29.2.2004. It was also pleaded that in fact it was a perpectual lease, which could not be terminated. The trial court, namely, the District Munsiff allowed the petition and passed an order dated 2.3.1990 for eviction of the lessees under clause (h) of sub-s. (1) of S.21 of the Act holding that it was not a permanent lease and that S.21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act would be applicable to the lease in question.

5. Both parties preferred revision before the district court, the lessors against part of the order rejecting their petition under clause (p) of S.21(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act whereas the lessees against the part of the order of evicting them under clause (h) of sub-s. (1) of S.21 of the Act. The learned District judge held that it is a lease of permanent nature. S.21(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act therefore will not be applicable. The order of the District Munsiff was reversed except the part by which eviction under S.21(1)(p) of the Act was refused.

6. The respondent-lessors preferred a revision before the Hon'ble High Court. It has been allowed, holding that the district court erred in finding that the lease was perpectual in nature. It is further observed that there cannot be any presumption in favour of perpectual lease since there should be clear and unambiguous language to infer such a lease. The provisions of the Karnataka Rent Control Act have been held to be applicable, de hors the contract of lease and, the lessor has been found to be entitled to move a petition for eviction of the lessee under S.21(1)(h) of the Act, even before the expiry of fixed term of 99 years.

7. A perusal of the judgment of the High Court indicates that one of the two contentions raised before it was that the finding of the District Court, holding that it was a perpectual lease is erroneous. According to the lessor, the lease was for a fixed period of 99 years. Alternatively, the submission was even if it was a permanent lease, provisions of S.21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act would be applicable for seeking eviction of the lessee on the