Smt Maqbool Jan vs Smt Nayeemunnissa on 10 June, 2010

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Maqbool Jan vs Smt Nayeemunnissa on 10 June, 2010

Bench: L.Narayana Swamy

 

 _ - _n..n....... . n 

 

   ﬁ.'.{3ROE£A.NDAL KGF-5&3 rm.
V'  K.RAGH'AVEm3RA mo, ADV.)

 

Iii 'i'}IE HIGH COURT OF' KARNAIAEA A1? BANGALORE
DATEB Tram 'rm mm mm' OFJUHE 2910  
BEFORE % %

ms HGRELE l£R.J'£.3"5'i'IGE   % T' 1 V

2. am', mqaoaz JAN, '» . _
w/:3 mm A.sm.mA,5m, 
AGED ABGIJT 53  

2. aaoaﬁnaamas,    
ago I.ATEA.!3_1:)'.KI-IA£_§B!,'g _  % 
At}-EDABGIIT     

PETI'£'I<)!~IERi'3' 2     
RIAT  
  I51.

3} C3 {ATE 
AGED ABOUT 31' 
lzmtr £0. 15,  BLGCK,
 ' ..... .. V

%%  A Kc+z?~a6'a 29:.
in 

810 mm: ;aJ.m.mmm

AGED mmn 59 mans,

Rfﬁfif 33.12, ram swag.

 pmmonmns

 "am. mmmmmmaa

W] C) MUSKEER A%EI'},
AGED AﬁOU'1' 46 YEAR3.

"K



RIAT N{>.572, PEDDAPALLI RQAD,
00RA&§.UB§PE'T;

my - 563 19 1.  Rwsmmﬁrmf

(av MI 3 mt & DR A331'. FOR GFA HOLDER,  I   . 'j  :_ "  %

*r1-as HRRP mm: {mum smrrxon 115022! yam xz;w« 'A V' 
smman m or K.R.!£C-T, a.eAms;f::.mE tannm, 
2.36.2609

, Pawn» IN RR 2m.15::2oo7%ea=_'ri11:._m,g 5 KGLARQ' Tztananmama , REVBIGH PETITION Arm comma THE "ORDER THE PRL. DETRICT JUDGE, DATED: 29.09.2307, PA%ED EH Hi}. 1 3.] 2i13.04, €l'--H. TEE * V L' FILE OF THE 15" ADDL. K.<}.F., ALLQWIHG ms PETITION' mznmtnzsa szcmox 3 112) (a; (<1) (hi. (0) (1') WW' 3EC'I'3*3?i 5 0? 3¥4ﬂi«"*?73°'ITg " "

mm H.R.I~E.P. coaﬁrsim am my, m I-IRC N::.11/§{1'(A)4 ox: .Ist Add}. Civil Judge (Jr. Du.) pwmaung initiated by the "La-----«a&wed and an order has bean Tm petition ﬁled under Scone' n 2i(§j% :§; (1-1 ma with Sectioxz. 5 (cf Karnataim Rem Ac«:;,z 1999 m allowed and the peatiozm is _ _v qu.it,*w.cafJearﬁ lmndaverthewaaant portion Selma]: in within 2 :ﬁantm and the . : .'pe1:itiJn:m- has cha11@ the same in ER No. 15/2007 on the file of that: Pr}. Dhtrﬂat Judge, Kaiar, and the same 7 has hem clisrniued an 2.6.2009 aghast which this petitionit-zﬁad. k

2. The learned Counsel suBnzitms'~« _f:t12aV'£V' peﬁﬁsamrs are the 1%! '_of_ Molﬁ Khasim, who was 3 "

situatad at Bamar Sn-act,' Bamax mm bourzdaﬁ Abdul Sattar, West -- Ncrth -

xx-imaappam meet. Abdul Satmr was of the said ahep % 4. hm initiated the Preoeedizm the rmponxient to quit, vnmte and . V s the vacant portion of the property. The f% abjecw n whet-an' they have disputed relatiomhip of the landlord. The Court below wit1mutcormidm'ingthesame,a1bwedtheprwee4:lings 'R ° ~:.%w5: - West

5. In the mm: case, irmtead of case to the Civil Caurt for deaziaion. the . amrwﬁ the proceedings agaﬁast '

6. Further, the km-ma {3ou.na-9 ,1 'rm' af the dispute in V. 'V between Abdul Sattar anaged hndku-d Stat. 27.9.1999. It as sumimj property which is the 'i.o.V;-. simatod at 3% Street, schedule pa~mw' 6' fget xsrm facing Em Street, mated sﬁes by VECEIII space belonging m L wmma, the sale am. by which has pumlm the property ﬁmn Late % %4 the deaeripuon. arf the schedule prepotrty is 44053612, Horth - Sout.h:ﬁO£aet Municipal Katha No.34-2(a): 395 situated at Oorgait, KGF (F7311 Line Vmixxity), Rabertszmpat T Citymuxﬁoiyallimitaandthaaamch beundedenthe East by K.rTahnappa'a hause, 'Wastw V.S.Surya:mmyanan's housa, North by South by Road, mm with all _ V Y

7. Inv1ew' cfthe prgceedirm and also the 'V d:a:mm* . The Fish Lam mac description wars I-IRC Court has met V Ex.£)1 and D2, the ca't::ﬁaé' ' in Os Noses/1999 suit was ﬁkd by Abdul Khasim hljtnmfmn agahmt Abdul Sattar and Abdul Sattar and Musheer of Haymz.a::m1aa' s have deposed that . V s Vaéizeciuie property whi<:h is subject mama" in the prmoeaedﬁg which is 50 mtrs away from the _u_: .'Bamar Street. nwz -- Mahamm Ghxzauac. in we evﬁmm has stated that within Sfﬂ Infra away from the T Bawar St:-eat. The Bazaar Street itself dam mt fmd a phmmtheschauspmopatymsazeaeeamgag between Abdul Sattar and A' aubmittned that Iklushaezr Am-am is not new % deed and what 7a awn in the Vicinixy which sa ﬁumxhed % *9. In map-act of Section an ordw far the purpose' 'tlxzegshenukd have been am! also these shoulxfl. the mm to deposit ordm-, there is no éizgii. is a nonoom-plahnce of if 2'? (2) (a).

I _ evidence, the tenants hava stained by that the Lmazord me not % 'gaﬁaéed relatiuxxship betwm mg par'ms' . But * I Ccwuft has mt ﬁi the same ﬁn its cram"-. the impugned h gawtmtua and zuasushahmbla. ' he submitted to set asisda the mid ordtar. It is aha submitted that 5ﬂn Caurt aha eazzﬁrﬁ the order of the HRC. Csurt without aaagning any reasons. Both 'cm Courts haw not ﬁndiw, as to that jural relatﬁomlaip. _ aubmitwd ha aﬂmv tmk

11. Wlw the was ha cﬁ mt prmcnt.

1'2. Whenever a far an evictisn of the 'Vﬁpraxviaﬁon of law, and jural relauonsraip. the same he in mt entiﬂed talczen a yomxi that Smt. landlady ma Abdul him the tenants anwred Whetn such speciﬁc yuund is requirmnt on tbs part of the Court ' 'to d1rec' S: rd to farms' 1: the mmm'mIa' to satisfy V r 'ﬁe oeuid ever prociuce oral t if them ' n hemem the parties' , he can the sama. In the inamnt case Court has mt Y talaananyatepsteiaaueéirectiantothelaneilordto place mxaeriala in raspact ofhia claimﬁaa a. aepoaicsm ofDW1 and DUI? L P1am' &' have filed the aakl "

injunction. During the £2: the dmdam Abdul led um: evidamae in which mm that the asspumt the emu lane situated.

._ husband _. in Bmaar lam situated 50 mire property. The awnsers {sf the are not clear as to where the H'Fiah Lina Vigﬁnity. Ever: an wan' cf the % % % Muskmer Aw and Mommmecz Gltwuse, wha aha spaaifcaﬁy dhpum that the Na m is not T gr 10 thelandlordarxdshadisd mthamaxnrlightasmr the pwpwty. They aha apecﬂally adduced the that there is 9; djwcrepancy in both % wmeh the Hayemunnjssa said mama. Und.m- these T. is:

dispute mm' ward to tines with regard tn the purpose of aviation, the saw. shtszzfciiiw» 'ainwared by astaigﬁg '

3 issues mamly:

1;; 'A * prmtes that she is the peﬁaion sdzeduiez premisw and 3 her and the rwpondanbsf

4. the petitiamzr is mama for me relief A aﬁziciiwwﬁfiiemmmdsnfgiedinﬁwpeﬁﬁon?

_ L' The issue Html and 2 are answered as ll

16. Tm HRC Court whib answering the "wane Ham! and 2 has referrcad the evidezwe of Abdul the (3%: xmam. undm Abdul Sattar. It that aim» Abdul Khasm has adm1tte:3' that LR'a of time Malﬁ Klmaim I stand in this peﬁtinn. m uuckxr Section 43 of was preferred that: 2006 harm.» the and the same aka cam Principal Diatrict Judge:

furthe1f_ to formulate an auitabh af the parties. Thh . the I-WC pumadjng is aka not i fa; 'ilwasona that the hananta at nu point of _ point was that, Nayaeamunxnhaa who claw an landlady has zmtpinchased thesaitl property Abdul Sattar. Hvmoe, she would act become: the landlady ﬁr tin tmzaxain. 'Th said admiaafmn of Abdul 7 12 Klaasim in OS 503/99 cannot be: taken far deszsiding the dhpum anf jural relatinnahip between landhdy - Smt. Hayaenaumrxiaaa and the prmant tr.-nanm. Hemp, the said reason aaa:g.zmd' by the EEC Court at ~ not correct. '11:: anly case: reported in 385 between Amgum V/3 Court bald that 'When 1535?

E E . I the tenant; it is incwnbent f_ ﬁe civil cow-r1wecIW%naf0'%ev'J%%%%%%réga:*-T} %

17. the ewde:m:e' of Abdul DW1 in as N<:.5G3I1999 and DW2. Abdul Sathar has 3 he aeki the peﬁtion Schedule thrw othm- shops in her favcmr. Ex.'I32::_Viav_ Sale Deed cxwuted by Abdul 27.69.1999. In respect {sf discrepancy as % by I-IRC. com-t that vicinity in naming but r W 6 , 'As ,tmd by : DWs.2 aw 3 the B% Street am Fish Line are T 1'3 abutﬁzg to mch other and situated within tha limits of 506 R.

18. Though, we can find d':screpaxx:1'<m in the light of ' vicinity imelf is mat a major ' .

eontcntionn am they am Sathar and mat mam said crapute was also a 503/1999 where Abdul am, the property who are the in favour of am.

mic daed as per Ex~s.P1 and has been idamsami by bf the Smt. Hayeemunniaaa who me the 'henanta in}-IRC 3.112%. is mfmai by the HRC Court that, the Ezaw fled EA 2 made: Sec*.:%an 43 at' am % Rent Act, 1999. ms name came ha be agamt which thsa temcnta preferred rant mvﬁsion petition 14/QCJO5 that aka mme to be W 14 dhmlksed. The Diatztict Judga has directed the PHRC Coursz to frame an 'mane of juml Aw-ordiﬂgty. the am has been amwered the landlady. In View of the same, dhputed by the tenants in af between the prizes' has __ 'm;x 3,5¥3~*'7f3ﬁ. V. £3 Fimﬂy, ggaxgx 2"

Sectﬁtzan 43 cfthe

ii) rent revision petiticn 141 %

20. made an 3 aacmaians, __._sti1l sxﬁiwa, have got atzrerg for ' caxmat be repeated. As it is bald by Ease referred supra. when thaarc is a . ts Mar tea the cm: cc.-as-2 fer darﬁaratiaii of . It in rrua that under .':'aectu:sn' 43 of the Rent Act, the mm has be-mm ref.-:rre& to the CiviICaurt,th:aIand10rdfa.i}st:osatiafytheCnurtby "\ 15 placixgncaatwiab. Intheimtantease,thela.ndIadyhas mminecihe;rhusba12.dan:iahat1:nev'ende1:'nfthe wary. Both ef them spam in favour sf X& m ----- tin high 'rm which '3 subject maths: awarding rm u " 'V who was tbs vendor has deposed En sold in ﬂavour of H ' an': " amm Irma ham purchased by %v1,r:;§::%%a;::¢h mtmaxs are placed which gwggt pu.r'pase of Secitaen 43 mm ia an 1 - ..._i_m-3.1 mzammhip dispute.

I-Iamze, armwered in fawn: of 1 .' ' TEz;¢ Court also rﬁerrecl the judit of cam reported in 2000 Supreme Appeal 9552, Part B gamma' 5:; is new that % A = by the defmdanzsjbr mjwmbn am: not one .. 2:5 question oftitie gone into or decided in such ' siJit~thedi"nir1s|ﬁ:9\m'Ha's:;itmn9tbiIzduzg' 15 {make ﬁxation aftzftleinicztserusuit. Exam meneﬁwning of issue an titlein eartiersuit may natbesuﬁiderzt'. dhputa, but only me jural azskﬁd in the earlim suit in (33 a bearm canthse-presant

23. Um»:-r am 1%' the mane: fa % 7 ~ mam: rm mathe1- in mt solve tm mmar objection is only on 5urs1 juml retautanship has hem nod-Ling is required tn there are 89:93:: minute % j " Coume1aubm1t1aed' that since an been passed under '27(a.) {:1} and (h) for V but no cvidmce has been recorded. In the V of the subnﬁssinn, judgment and or-dam' passuﬁ by Vane original Court and also rwhian Court that, Court alwuiri have rectxsrded tlm avidence for the put-page of f gm 4 21%;} gag ﬁﬁ {Ex}. $235: E féxzﬁ ﬁ&'§ itaalf iﬁ $6? a reiiai' ts {E13 '%£na3'z'§.% 332391 aka grameaﬁinga may give aézeiier him émr féw mamtim :3: f;$a3*a,= §'mm {ha §1ﬁa§}§,€'3§§ :"

rwgi ai' 'ﬁzs $, it $3 men %;%1a§ €213 T' 1 cyoia mgsairﬁix Hg is wrxirxg R$.§<}:g'«-t iii arﬁgy is avsié §md3§:1§.§ s3§ V mm:-g Gang: :2: gzggﬁ-aﬁt g-39%] aim $5 6:123 tezmzxm. to Vasaéza axaé hgriéaifzﬁr §%:g §an&1$:é; an ar "mfaz*& éizmtmi ﬁm tgzmﬁ Eaaﬁﬁing war yasaﬁaaiﬁﬁaf "R§§§:*£3 Ea he paﬁd:

E5; 'VV-thﬁé cﬁwﬁma-mamas E ﬁmﬁi am rammn ts azﬁer ﬁawréigaggr, ravéaian %% Sd/...

JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court