Landlord's eviction petition under Sections 27(2)(a) and (r) of the Karnataka Rent Act was dismissed by the rent court due to serious dispute over ownership; the High Court upheld dismissal, noting no sale deed produced and a Tahasildar letter disproving it.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:3956 HRRP No. 82 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.82 OF 2015 (EVI)
BETWEEN:
SMT. ASMATHUNNISA W/O MOHAMMED IQBAL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.20/1 1ST FLOOR, 7TH MAIN ROAD, PADARAYANAPURA, BANGALORE – 560 026
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHAIKH SAOUD., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by JAI JYOTHI J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SMT. HASEENA BANU W/O AKRAM PASHA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.119, 8TH CROSS, RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 077
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. D A SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS HRRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.46(1) OF THE KARNATAKA RENT ACT,1999 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED24.06.2013 PASSED IN HRC.NO.10052/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XVII ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.27(2)(a)&(r) OF THE KARNATAKA RENT ACT 1999.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petition is filed by the petitioner stating to be the landlord against the respondent for eviction by invoking Section 27(2)(a) and (r) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 (for short ‘Rent Act’) before the Rent Court. The said petition is dismissed by the Rent Court with a direction to the petitioner to approach Civil Court for adjudication of title and for other reliefs.
the tenant of the petition premises and accordingly directed the petitioner to approach competent Civil Court by proving the title.
has produced Ex.R-1, which is a letter issued by the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk, which proves that the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk, has not executed sale deed in favour of the petitioner regarding petition schedule premises. When the petitioner is claiming that she has purchased the petition schedule premises as the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk has executed sale deed, but there is no document to show that the petitioner is the owner of the petition schedule premises, but this allegation is repudiated by the respondent by producing documentary evidence - Ex.R-1 issued by the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk, to show that no such sale deed was executed as contended by the petitioner. Therefore, the rent court is correct in observing dispute regarding there is no proof of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.
rent receipts proved that the respondent has paid rent to the petitioner, they are not found to be genuine. Upon
considering the chronological events of dates of issuance
of notice and the date mentioned in the rent receipts.
Thus, the rent court is correct in disbelieving the said rent receipts.
the petitioner is owner of the premises and produced the
said letter issued by the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk, that the petition premises is not sold out by sale deed, then for proving the title direction issued by the rent court to the petitioner to approach competent Civil Court, is found to be correct, justified and legal one. Therefore, the petition is found to be devoid of merits, therefore it is dismissed .
Sd/JUDGE
DR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rent court rightly dismissed the eviction petition for want of proof of landlord-tenant relationship and directed the petitioner to the civil court.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Asmathunnisa W/o Mohammed Iqbal
Smt. Haseena Banu W/o Akram Pasha
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
