Karnataka High Court
Smt. Ghnyanamba vs Sri.Melagiriyappa on 31 January, 2020
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS
H.R.R.P. NO.27 OF 2018
BETWEEN
SMT. GHNYANAMBA
W/O. SHIVAMURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O. NO.45/A, BENNAGANAHALLI,
DORRAVANINAGAR POST,
OLD MADRAS POST,
BENGALURU - 560060.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI BHARATH KUMAR V, ADVOCATE)
AND
SRI.MELAGIRIYAPPA
S/O. LATE. CHIKKAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
R/O. NO.82, 3RD CROSS,
RAJAJINAGAR,
WEST OF CHORD ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560010.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI D.S.JAYARAJ, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 46(1) OF
THE KARNATAKA RENT ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER
DATED:18.11.2017 PASSED IN H.R.C.NO.8/2017 ON THE
-2-
FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER
SECTION 27(2)(r) OF KARNATAKA RENT, ACT, 1999 AND
REJECTING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 27(2)(a),
(1),(n) R/W SECTION 31(1)(c) OF KARNATAKA RENT ACT,
1999.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Though the matter is coming up for "Hearing on Interlocutory Application", with the consent of the learned counsel on both sides the matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that though the petitioner was a tenant in the property in question belonging to the respondent, however on 29.01.2003 the parties have entered into an agreement to sell and out of the sale consideration of Rs.2,25,000/-, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- till date and the question of payment of rent will not arise. There is also a suit in -3- O.S.No.4873/2014 pending on the file of the VII Addl. City Civil Judge at Bengaluru. It is submitted that the respondent, concealing the fact that O.S.No.4873/2014 is pending on the file of the City Civil Judge at Bengaluru, filed HRC No.8/2017 seeking eviction of the petitioner and for payment of arrears of rent.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as per the impugned order dated 18.11.2017 the petitioner herein was placed exparte. While drawing the attention of this Court to paragraph No.9 of the impugned order, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the notices sent to the petitioner returned with a shara "address is insufficient" and "address not traced". Thereafter instead of taking substituted notice by way of affixture, the respondent has taken out the paper publication and notice published did not come to the knowledge of the petitioner. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that if the matter is remanded and -4- an opportunity is granted to the petitioner she will be able to defend herself before the Trial Court.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent disputes the receipt of the amount as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the respondent admits that he has not denied fact that a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- has been paid by the petitioner under the agreement to sell.
5. Having heard the learned counsels and on perusing the petition papers, this Court finds that an opportunity for the petitioner to contest HRC petition on merits is required to be afforded. It is also noticeable that the respondent has not disclosed the factum of O.S.No.4873/2014 pending before the civil court. However, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that in his petition the respondent has mentioned about the pendency of O.S.No.4873/2014. Nevertheless, there is no -5- mention of pendency of the suit in the impugned order.
6. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the Trial Court. Therefore petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.11.2017 in HRC No.8/2017 is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration while affording an opportunity to the petitioner herein to file her objections and thereafter proceed in accordance with law.
7. During the course of these proceedings the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and the same has been deposited by the petitioner before this Court. The deposit made by the petitioner shall be remitted to the Trial Court for appropriate orders. The parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 24.02.2020 at 11.00 a.m. without waiting for further notice. The Trial -6- Court is also directed to dispose of the petition as expeditiously as possible.
8. In view of the disposal of the main matter as above, I.A.No.1/2019 is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KLY/