IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.2/2021 (EVI)

C/W HOUSE RENT REV.PETITION NO.3/2021 IN HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.2/2021:

BETWEEN:

SMT. HASEENA, W/O LATE ATAULLA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT M.K.K.ROAD, SHIVOMOGGA-577 202. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAJ K.N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

INAYATH, S/O AMANULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, BEEDA SHOP, R/O M.K.K. CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA-577 202. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.S.PRASAD, ADVOCATE)

THIS HRRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.06.2020 PASSED IN REVISION (RENT) NO.3/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE PETITION AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.07.2019 PASSED IN H.R.C.NO.06/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA ALLOWING THE PETITION FOR EVICTION.

IN HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.3/2021:

BETWEEN:

SMT HASEENA, W/O LATE ATAULLA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT M.K.K. ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA-577202. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAJ K.N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SYED PEER, S/O GHOUSE, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, SHAMIYANA EMPLOYEE, R/O M.K.K. CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA-577202. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.S.PRASAD, ADVOCATE)

THIS HRRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.06.2020 PASSED IN REVISION (RENT) NO.4/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 46(2) OF KARNATAKA RENT ACT, 1999 AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.07.2019 PASSED IN HRC NO.7/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE PETITION, SUIT FOR EVICTION.

THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 11.07.2025, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

CAV ORDER

These two petitions are filed against the orders passed in Revision (Rent) Nos.3/2019 and 4/2019, vide order dated 01.06.2020, on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Shivamogga, allowing the revision petitions and setting aside the orders passed by the Trial Court in HRC Nos.6/2014 and 7/2014 dated 06.07.2019, on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga.

2. The factual matrix of the case of the petitioner herein in both the HRC cases is that, the respondents are the tenants in the respective petition schedule premises and sought the eviction order praying the Court to direct the respondents to deliver the vacant possession of the same and also to pay all arrears of rent and that they have committed default in payment of rent. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the petition schedule property and the petition schedule property is required for their bonafide use and occupation. The petitioner acquired the petition schedule property through registered Will dated 16.04.1986 executed by the grandmother of the petitioner by name Smt. Sydani Bi W/o Hayath Sab, who was the absolute owner of the petition schedule property. It is contended that after the death of the grandmother and mother of the petitioner, the petitioner became the absolute owner of the petition schedule property. It is contended that the respondent is a tenant under the petitioner on oral agreement and the tenancy between them commences from 1^st of every month on a monthly rent of Rs.300/- during the period of the deceased mother of the petitioner and subsequently, it was enhanced to Rs.600/- per month as per the oral agreement. The rent has to be paid on or before 5^th day of every month.

3. It is further contended that the schedule premises has been let out to the respondent for running a petty beeda shop in HRC No.6/2014 and for running a shop/residence in HRC No.7/2014. The respondents committed default of payment of rent from last four months and the respondents are due of rent from October 2011 to the tune of Rs.28,800/- in both the cases and on demand also, they did not pay the amount. In both the petitions, i