Sri Jayanthilal Chandulal Kothari vs Sri C K Radesh on 16 June, 2009

[Cites 18, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Jayanthilal Chandulal Kothari vs Sri C K Radesh on 16 June, 2009

Equivalent citations: 2009 (5) AIR KAR R 252

Bench: B.V.Nagarathna

 

§'1'i{f<i:'.N<Z>. i.56.Z{§'{1')

:94 my; HIGH (sum-rr or §<A1<r~m'm.;A A1' 
L>;m;;:.) '1'H£:3 1141:: u,'f3m we Jung, if  °' «
BEmf<fI_.*;3» ,_ A . .   4
mm; H(}N'i:5Li§ M1<s.4us1*:c}z§ 

::;_r9_;t¢;%1:;8;cg;%:;,:~§:>1;:ﬂ;29§zf %

S/"0 (MAN mum ;<1_>imAm 
AGES AE{Z3L¥T 59' YEARS._  »

R;'A"I' ﬁ*i;z¥;'f;:1T:uo.4::, Pi;ﬁLi~'£§'l'HUR'APAR'i'Mi€:N'i'S
4'1'!-3 3?-1.c:ur,}:'::,..M2=;£)r£.;_;s.\;zA; N_A<.Z'{AR'

Sm JA¥AN1'1~m,A:§ CHAN«1§L£'L&_1:} s<:i'_<;;f;"1=i_!A:~::

moi: cs;-i:~Rsf«: 531311.23 .%  '
B&.NvGAs,uK'£;;<2 1..  _ 

L  Pb:1'l'1'I()Nl£R
(By .'$ri: «uvr;'A%Ass'<;{::A:i'!§5E§'. ADV.)

 ' 3i<iL:4£::._t"<'AuEsi1
"  ;g;.,Q'%<.;;'m.' mssuava MUk"'1'HY
 A€L':E'§.}_ 'way? 3'? YEARS
.  R/AT' 51;'; 12, um No.21
 Sf€i.'_'iP{IRAM, SESHADRIP1!RAM
BA?-§_GALORE~20
  Rk$SPO{\§L)it}N'£'

A   g:.4:;3r._S£~:: 1) N MA£'~iJUNA'i"H 85 <3 R V nanny, A1)V&5._)

'l'HiS HKRP F1LtiL} UfS 4%) {1} OF KR AC5!' A(;'r2'§JN!$"i' THE

f'aR1:>ER DATED: 5.4.2097 PASSED 2:»: HRCLNG. 2eo;'m<:>2

on THE) FILE U15' <'1"-em; c'mr;1«* JUDGE, <;<)vm'= OF' SMALL
CAUSES, BANGALGRE, A!..LC}'.lf!NG ms: PEI'!'!'!ON FILED
U73 4:; G59" KR ACT.



 

 

.H§{!<.i:'.f\iO. 1.36.1500!'

'ibis HRH? having been heard and rrezscrved 
on this day, the couzt pmmmnced the foIImving:;**-- .  ._ u _.__ 



'H115 Revision Petitioxti is  {By :"§'J.I€ 

chaiiengmg the order   A  

HR{J.No.20(Jf2UU2 by the  of Vvfifauses at
Bangalore. « H
2. For   Q1; --cd!3€éenien¢6; "£2176 parties shall be

rethrred toi as  the trial Court.

3. '£'In:_ érctieiranwt the _pet:iti-zmcr had ﬂied a

pctihfﬁﬂ gmdér  of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999

 V. "('t"<;>rV' 'ttaie 3= észa1{"€A.&pi'  (railed "Rent Act, 1999} contending

   ti§cf"[-gﬁéasoiutc owner in respect of the schaduk:

prt:}_p;:i'tiae§;.  $403.13'? and 19 being a composite

 *.properfg¢ __ 3~situatm at 1" Main Road. Scshadnpuram,

 and 1" Main Road, Srirampumx. Bangaioxtv

   Thzz said pmpcrty was giftaeti to the petitioner by way" of a

 Registered Gut Heed dated 30.12.1999 by his fattzcr. That

the petitioner had got issued a notice on f::.3.20U2 and the
same was neccxvcd by the respondent on 8.3.2002 calling

upon the respondent to attain tenaicy and also to pay //'1 riR£<B.i'€Q. i3b.£UU! arrears 0:' rent. The schedule premises was father of the petitioner te one .

deed of iease dated L4. 19?? and tee .Wa.e two vacant: sites, the the purpose of.:the_'1eeiseA'r:v'as to 'i£;li,";' business in retail timber. As»pe_; the"tefi:nrs the 1 respondent maid put up .suﬁ;:t:1_§§¢j=$ on his busmess duling and the monthly rent wee to the petitioner, required by his father for eompiex, U.S.No. 26551 of city Court, Bangai<;re," but as not pressed. it was eonteziiiezi" in eviction penuon that the schedule * was by the petitioner for putting up a er9t:ti3:::1ereié3i,Veeg1i1;31ex on the entire sehaiuk: premises and he ﬂnfacie arrangements to obtain neeessary pian and lieeirefxe ﬁom the corporation of City of Bangakwe and he V' :. "'g)Qssessec£ suﬂm '" 1:11: funds Ibr the proposed' eozxsnuetion ~ needed his father was wiﬂing to support " Wl'~'i'e thereiétxte sought possession of the schedule premises by fiimg a petition under Secﬁo:a'4(} of the Rent Act. 1999. 3 {/E:,./ ---

j'$f{}{P.N<'D. lit}. Z00"?

peﬁtum was tiled on 13.4.2007. ummg the pendescy:

revision: miition, the Hoxfble Supreme {Jourt by . 23.1 1.2(.)0'f dmeeted that since the point " * Leave petition is also in issue ipefom A. ibis t§:=,-gs' revision petition the saw: questiqn beiﬁeeitied by*s%;Vii:.isv in L. accotdance with law the made by this court in the '

5. As sta§3:=:é:i:««£aﬁ:bove:;._ of the Special Leave Slgpfeme Court and in the absen<je"<§fV pmceecimgs before the {Km} '£11: the statement of objeciiicms before the r.m;n'~«pn"i'i.2.20o?, inter aria, contendmg '3'€I1g?__eA}_:ret_1tioz1u.V'ivas-----sot nzxajntamabkc under Section 40 of ﬁle" Rerxté :1999 "and that even if S€CiZt(}I1 40 was to apply ts. the t'aei:sjjai:id circumstances of the case, 'mere was no pieaeligg xegand to the petiﬁoner bemg ready and Wilts" ' g ate aasmaxgsence the work on the schedule premises that the

-- Aejﬁtiener dis not reqtum the schedule pnemises as he had " Wsevemi ether vacant lands and pmperties avaiiabie with hixn far the proposed development ans that the timber business was the only source 01 lweiihood far the respondent and hence, sought cthsmissai of the peﬁtion.

Ev L I' §iH.}<i'.E'~$O. 136 .2{3'{}7 _ 5 _

6. In support of his case the petitioner examined as PW 1 and got marked h}xs.P- 1 to P-if) respondent did. not iet in any evidence.

7. 011 the basis of the material on meg-i'd,~--» raised the foﬂowzirzg yoints for its c:g>3:1:s::3'::iTu=;.z?at":.*'s:).1:.'an:.. '

1. Whether the pen':ie3:_1er_ proves" LhatT".§:é~V.i.re:;1:i3¥e the . ' property to put 3;» comizzgrciﬁf cigmplﬂx as contemplated uncier__Séc£_iU.Q_ 453 Gf_t_he_.Ka1nataka Rent Act as C4:-11_$end'ed?" V H "

'C:-.s;?. _ '_ "

What order of and a;1swci9é£i'.\\.;JQ_ivn té 111:: aﬁiixmativc and allowed thc petition' gziider bf the Rent Act, 1999. Being csfdcr, the respondent has pI'€'ﬂ3I'Z£'€d * &ti:V'1is Iéﬁisib1:; peﬁﬁﬁﬁ;

T. J ' lcarnsd senior counsel, !:§ri.K.{}.i~€agi1' avan M/_s.'L§$;:3:: Aﬁsoctiates for the: petitioner and iearneci £}.N.Manjunath fiat the respondent hemin. SIi.l{.{}J<agI1ava11 learned senior wunsai While ' contending that the petifion ﬁled "tmdar Section 40 of the Kaxnataka Rent Act was not maintainabic eiaborated. his submission by stating that the Katnataka Rent Act, 1999 élw ii}-*:Ri:'.£\IQ. l3E§.2{§{}?' ... .....

that the petition is not maintainabie U13 40 of the Act or B1 the mtcmaﬁve to dismiss the petition. Leaxned coyzxﬁsﬁhas also referred to the Ucihi and Maharaailtra the course of his submission.

10. Per oontza, it is oontcndcdv', learned counsel for H16 respotlcientfictiiimnel'.'iiif1§;1:.4§:§1c ; does not call tbr any interfcrcn(;é'V«i§ias,n1u§:h ats' inc court rightly concluded that p«§tit§ox i "mailltainabic under Section 40 of the Rent 1"?-=.!Z_?.*~_3 revision has to be ciism:issed%_." {' S€C1:ZiOI1 40 pertam' S to vacanzf _'sc£1e:i11le pre:mi$e$ is vacazxt lam:

and oxﬂy 3 for the purpose of dating busiﬂess put up during the subsistence Qf V' . 165535 011331 it; a inf the lane} and that; petitioner for putting up a commcrctiai complex enabics the petitioner to seek posscsskan under aaid provision agxoiwzithstandixlg anything centained 1 J_ ' iii %Sc£:ti0:£1 237 of the Act which is a generai pmvisien dealing eviction of respondents and since, the petitioner had cempiicd with the conditions appiicable tn the facts (sf the case, §30S$€5§SiﬂIi of the schetiuje pmmims ought to be given to the pcﬁﬁoncrs. , HKRP.N0.i3b.$UG§ .. 3, _ 1 1. Having heard the learned counsel on both-Sjidea the. following points arise for my cozisiderati0I}:..§_'44:

:1 Whether the Kent Act. 1999 'E apply is the premises used [gr nszrnrifésidiéntiai " _ purpose, except p1'emi$e.s hawrag it (:7.-;.veVc1 rm; ' * ' exceeding 14 sqmtx used _fe: o'e~31arrzer:x't2!f..__ purpose?

it} Whether the ms in invsicfng sadism 4!? cf the scagaicing-géessession Qfthe sci':eciuiepra9:f.Izzl9e$,;~'>***~ , iii} Whether .3er;::"o'n._, ﬁgs a,_p;;[ues'~ when ifmre is $:::Vz!crar@V_ pf Vt}=.,e__v;L::orii21 'isr;rjxE" from the rest (if :im3"pn_emz'.~:'es whicit 'ujﬁif natgomase undue bmdship 2c;:;;:1~.e rgspongzmt? _ -V .... has made out a {Vase uiaﬂxzr S::I!,:!:'€m ~?.;(_3 :31' £219 Act? V '-v} 1'2. ;"£"11,c 11r.iciVir§;:5t1¥fc2c£ '§:'a¢;;.ts an: that the subjcct matter of vacant and tilt: purpose for which the lcassa I for carrying on business in retail trade of tazizfapr a_r1d iia hrder to do so, permission was gantcd by the to put up temporary structures (faring the V"'V'$u£;sfi:ste1:1cc ofthe Lease. "i"herefore, the subject matter of the 15 not buiiding, but vacant iand or bmidmg sites.

13. Section 40 is a spccxai pI'()ViSIOI1 reganzimg vacant buﬁding sites. '£135 saxci pmvision is an additionai right ge/A BKRi4'.§'«iO.iJE:a.ZUU:'

15. A bare reading of the above pmvisions it apparent that Seaman 40 of the Kasmataka Rﬁiit ' _ Section QM at the Delhi Rent Act are a}.m<_:)s,E. anti begin with a 11011-ObSt3I1I'f: clause and to other _9mvis1c:ms for seeisring _t:v1<:t:i(:e11 tzndcrV.';i1£: jcspéctiw: , Acts.

1:). The heading to thi; regangi to 'vacant that {1} xsfiniéh have been let" comprise vacant land ="m;§u3:}_;_§vI1i :}1--.it"is «-pexmigissibie under the bxﬁlding regulaticiris -.<3x1'j;. m1iixicif5ai"*-bye-iéiws, for the time being in force, is erect sszs;i'..Vb1:i1{ii13g¢ .,_'.'sI!1e'i;'I1er for use as a residence or for a11y't;tEic;fr ;3r;x:fpt§'sg:, _ "

(2) peuitloncr' gjroposmg to erect su-sh huiiding is :1:,1a'£i:ic'to"abtain possession sf the 12111:! Imm the: mspond.c;;t_Mbj; agreement with-J:3.i:a:1.

V_ .A ' = .. naakc an appikxcation to the cam": and the that, ' ' {a} '£pct1tior:.cr is ready and wxiiing to 4' eommence the war}: and that {ii} the severance of the vacant ianci iimm the ms'; of the premises W131 mat cause undue haztiship to the res}:-o31cient, than the Contra-119: may':-

(i) dimct such severance.

(11; place the petitioner in pczsscssiaon of the vacant land.

i'i}<.*<}:'.N«:3. 136.203'?

meter the case to the Uontroﬁer to determine the rent payable by the... e x responcient in respect of the rest of the Ikemises and < .

{iv} make such other order as he . _ fit in the cizeums$anoe*3'of £he_4c:a$e."-» ' 17?. However, there is one _ basic7£iii1Zerence'V_"_§)etvtreen.' 't§:1e'--.. pmvislons of the Kanlataiza Reﬁt. Act" Act V wrath xegarci to the detiiiisjon 0i"'itie:$-void_ "preziﬁsesf. Under the Karnataka Act "premieeéf Section 39} as follows:

x V {:}a i,~z;:'.Ic2_§rtgV as an clause (:1; ('ithny useiiwtor agriaxiturai pwpose. "

Section 34a; a3 foiiows:

V..:§zem1;; any building or hut or part of a .Ab£eiI'c1i.*t_§:i :or, fmvt other than 6: farm house, for or to be let 1 " 'i':?ic:tucies;

grounds cmzi out-housms. 3]' any appurfeﬁgmt to such, I)u:?d':'r..g km or part of such or hut and feet or to be iet aiong with such or hm erpart efbuilcﬁng or hut;

(11) any fumiture or equrprnent suppited by the ....pe£i2iom:rf<3»r the we iar: emzh bm?d£ng or in-:2' or part of a bruifciing; or hut;

{in} anyﬂjiztingﬁ cgjtxea to such building or part of <1 W.-:'!d:'r.gfer ﬁzz: more bemrﬁdai erajoggmeni therceﬁ but does not imrfude :12. room or other accommodation in a hotel or a Iodgzng homes. "

/3 i'1.%(§*<£'.f'«i<::. 1.56.200!

18. '£116: definition 01' a buziidmg under Section inc iiatnataka Act does not mciudc land but u11de'1iV:bec.." ' _ 01' the Act the deﬁnition of "premises" ':¢nn;i1gt)onc11_t$;" ~ bmlszimg and land not used ; A'

19. However, under the ue§i'm_ Ac:: deﬁned under Section 2(1) as tbigéivsz '(£1 "premises" means _any §Jui§£1ingVV_'or--V--~part Qf a Er,.ci!di.*:g whiaﬁ :':3A,'--a;-r is :".~*i£ér:c?;*;ri "2'::§?:r.c, !43!¢.séparaie!yfor use as a resizéémtgé or*_fbr_ or for any other pu:p0$e,'-- _z'_z_zc!:,:d+:s'::. ' ____ __(z}'*~_ wad authouses, If {inyj Ezézifding or part cf the " cin'§! by the peﬁtioner er in 31:53: ;':}~:,::'?d.--*.7" er . 0 £129 buildi ; . ._ . "=9 "9 does not Include a room in a 110121 or ' " f:o1_,;se;"

'1'iic..a_abc§w: of premises does not include vacant f_'~i3(;); ~._ln this context, it wouid also be of mlcvanm to ' zzkgnsﬂer the deﬁmtzﬁn of premises under the Maixaxashtzta " W£§'ent Act. Section. 'H8; iiiﬂﬁllfiﬁ prcmxses as toilows:

x'-»«//"

3-i.'r<H£»'.N€>. 136.200'?

""premises'*' means « any buiiding or part ofﬂr:_z"._ {building 1:31 or given on Zfcerwe separaiefgy' (::>_z'her"~g than a._fcmn building, zZncIudz'ng~ « w ._ L" 5 (2) the garden, grounds, gamg%._¢1nd*Qi£fv_ heuses, if any, appurtenant, »!o._3:.¢c§z_: buiiding "5-rug parfsfabuiiding, M

(ii) anyfittings imsuuh ﬁr';

par! 0}' C: bu:?di:2g f{:r '!Ize uféeneﬁdai erqbyment thereof F but does not or other accommodation in a ;_h'a-te-E. Jr: 3'

21. Under V' "?eiaha1'ashtra Act the defini1::i<:-11 . a buiidixixg or a part of buﬂdiigg aﬁdﬁncgudcs ga;:tIe11, ground and outhousc apgaurtxﬁizguituéto' a part of a buﬂding. iciut under the ,3--ia:i:f1:3aatﬁKaA ACE ﬁle : deﬁnition of "pxemiscs" not only iné'iu'déS'A but aisor any land not used fer Tile dcﬁniﬁon of "bmmmg under the Kamataka Act is similar to the deﬁnition of "pit::u3;scs" under the Delhi Act and the Maharashtra "_.c".t(:_t." '"'A_«'£'};1cre::t1:3x'c. the Ucihi Act and Maharashtra Act do not take Within the ibid ofciieﬁxiiﬁon of "'§:<*{:misc$", land not used for agﬁcuitznal purpose. On the other hand, under the Karnatakza Act any Land; not used for agricultural purpose comes the deﬁnition of pnsmiscs. {finder the circumstances, when: the Wonfi 'pmmisaf is used under 3 9:.

_// Hi'{i"{P.NO. 1:56 . 200"?

Section 40 of the islaxnataka Act and under Section Z'-*«1oiA the Delhi Act which provisions are although in meanings and contexts would vaxy. Howeve:';. .{)o:;h.V}5;efSe» of the phrase "where any .wnieh_V xbeen ietb comprise "vacant fan i' upon the braiding regulaﬁons 'vezeét V building Whether for a§...:4w:e$iﬁ,ence "or.for'§a11y other P111'p0se",under the is not deﬁned but the word scape not only Vacant buiiding as defined undeii-'__ et:bti1e."i%~',a1fnata1ca Act garden, glounci et.c., not used for any agricultuxai pmjpose as t;§1e"s:a331e also comes the deﬁnition of " ﬁiigjer Section 31:1} of the Act. But under the Delfzi I Act, since the definition of premises do not ex'£end__v'to land as such, hut only to buiidiug and garden, gmunds and out houses any appllrtextzant buildmg or to a part of such building, vacant land not fer agxiculturai purpose wouki not come the purview of sieﬁnition of pneixiises under the Delhi Act or the Maharashtra Act Since the deﬁuiﬁon of vacant ianci is not enunciated under the Kaxnataka Act, keeping in mind the object and puxpcxse of Section 40 ef the Act. vzsggant Land //~ 1-iéiiiia . N0 . 136 . 2&9'?

.. 1 .....

must be interpreted to inchme not only garden, grounds and one-houses. if any appurtenant to a buiiding or {Q of such building but also vacant land not used purpose as tar as Karnataka Act is conc_ei'i;e£i';~, 'ii{1e«Iefaz9e;.. Section 40 0f the Karnataka Act éappljee j1c}'t u&..x_'rec:§ze.t.it iand i.e.. vacant iauilding, sixes appiltffenant 3 at , a part {if a building. but aisovuum. not used for aggrieuitmai .e 'vaeant 'Aiﬁiﬂding site.

However, the term 16(_i)(l} of the Mailarashtra" 'eii?D_ei.i1i Act, are restricted to otggiy eilﬂi-Vhouses. if any appurtenant to a Bizﬁﬂing er: esuch building above vacant land.

" Aistbe. V':1fiIid6I;. Section 40 0f the Karnataka Act and « "o.ftb.e Delhi Act the said vacant Land eouid be put . i;a:3_ :a.V--v'res1dence 01;" far any other purpese £11011» commercial purpose} by erecting a building. AA ifilrte veﬁéwhen the petitioner is unabie ii-:3 ehtain possession of' iimm the respondent by an agreement. then he may Hémake an apphcaﬁon to the court. Under both the Acts, the Act envisages that court has to be satisﬁed wifﬁ regard to two conditicms {i} the yetaﬂener is ready and willing to commence the work, Q g .-

./' HHHP.No.i§b.2QU7

--. tit _

iii) the severance of the vacant: land Iiom the rest __of 1 the premises wouki not cause undue hm§ds3;i'p_V to the respondent. " V

23. A contention has been raised by the for the respondenta that the peuﬁoiner ;_;;§'s;xc__ 'botji above conditions and unless them is oil" vafcadt k' land from the rest of the .'i;.otWcause undue ixardshjp to the vc'ro'1"1.ld not have juxisdiction to gent It is furtlxer contended that' or the vacant land Iiom the is, where me entire iand. t,i1e.T 1ii:?rt3£ioner, then in such a case Section However, what £1213 to be noteﬁﬁs the the {words "'bui1di:::g"' sites in Section 40 of '.Ati*;:':,'?%:ct_b"ai1;1ci ti*1e words the "prezmses iei: compnse of vacant of the vacant land from the xesst of the P¥'ei::xisa6--.S'"'. r :"lI' under the Karnataka Act the delimtiou of "meant only buiidixag and land appurtenant to the then the contention oftl1e £earned oonnsei rm u respondent could have been accepted as the vacant land to the buiiding would then" have to be separated titom the rest of the building Ior the purpose of construction and which sevexance would not cause undue hardship to the resgzomient But when the defmition o:f"'ptem1ses" tglder the 1/ MERE' . Ni) . i .3?) . L500'?

.. 19 ..

Karnataka Act is not restricted to a building or vacant land appurtenant to a building, but also includes ianci not used ibr agricultural purpose, in that case, when the peuﬁoizer requires the entire vacant land, the question of A' would not arise. Merely because 3evera11c>e_ be"

apphcable when the entire plemisee jig requixed by the land Loni does._:1ot that V cannot be invoked icky the pet1ti§i1;et.who hae"'1e.v{é-oli': vezmnt land to a respondent. .*i':1¢:m2.~s:£é; c>f'i:i:xe" "vacant land" from the rest of the mandatcny condiaqn wl:1Aei1TvL'._t£1eVA3Vp:e:::1'i-see is eomprieeci of building as deﬁneé ﬁ::;1er_ the Act in which event the vacanétiajgd eppﬁrteﬁarit "K; a buiiding would be requixed by . Ewe iaed ten ptlfi}.-1 eonstrucﬁon as the land on which be called a vacant land or when a porﬂgﬁ ofa' land not used for agrgteultural puryose is rCQ;11l=f€(i, t.}:fy' the land E0111 and net the entire land. This is V' éj_ppaI'eni {mm the fact that Eﬁeetien 40 uses the Words K ef the vacant Land ﬂmn the rest 0f the premises?' Twhieh W-Quid apply' not enifz in the case of premises being 3. iauxidmg but aim to any land not used. ibr agricuitural purpose, as premises campuses both of the above under the Héiiik'. NO . i:§!':é . ;3i{}€.'}'1' ,.... ..

fsiarnataka Act. However, severance we uid not be applicable when the entire vacant land is required by the peﬁtioner,

24. ii is to be observed that Section 44L.¥«~~--.¥.i£;1s;-.__'_ incorporated under the Kamataka Rent the _ V' Uelhi Rent Act without netieinghi tiiétt ..vti1e -itie:i_.i111§i§:)i1V' of "premises" under both t't1e, Actex. tot§'3.i;1§f:

However, Section 40 of the "to be V harmoniously Section 3(a) of the Act. and building respectively. _3?.«'.%1e1_1.it is Efbeeomes obvious that ween t_Aiie1"en1;;'1:eV eat used for aguxzuitural purpose, which M the meaning of the Sam Act is Iequissed, then, the qtiesfien of severance would not arise.

-'{"herefti:fe, any éiieit eiicumstanee, the pet1tione1' is not §1*o§e that the severance of the vacant {and from premises would not cause undeue harﬂsknp to the msipfindent. Otherwise it would lead to an absurd result, Section 40 wouid be appik;-able oniy when a portion of V' iiize vacant Land is required by the "petitioner in which case enly principles of severance would be apphacable and" net when the entire £31121 is required and than when the entire vacant iand is required by the petitioner, the said segtion 5/' I» HKRE.&0.ije.dUU?

..., .....

cannot be invoked and the petitioner Weuid not have the benefit of SCCTIOII 40 of the Kaxnataka Act. in this context, it would be of xelevanetex the deiinition of premises under t1f1e"emt.wijjle _: §$em.baj;' --!§i.e1:§,ts Act, 1947 deiirmjon is sixnilar to 'e-1"' under me iiamataka Act 1«'a.:V:~«:t:§é;:'1~..e:i1c tieﬁnitien ¢$iiV*"greri:a:ses*"

under the 1-§.a1nataka,--- to the detiinition of premises Rent Act, 1999 and the deﬁn.Vit%,ef1;.__Q1":V'1u$'s:'€)1 Act is similar to the unciezgVtt:teVvV'lia1'nataka Rent Act 1999§ 26, case Section 40 begins with I}{)'}LZ§;:e(Z'!f}St;811t€V"C'1Ja ¥;3t»"5i€ and is a speeia}. pmmsien which has to b¢"'g1vé5' etieet to irrespective Gfwijxat is stated in Section 27 'eff 1=$%i3..'t§':.t1 is. a general provision. The meaning of Seeﬁorgéi-£3A«:'hes to: be interpieted so as to enhance the object xaztd imient of the said provision oonsidexmg the that that it t' '£1-z»3.$.:'é1n ever riding effect viz--a~viz Sectien :27' of the Rent Act. ___in fact it is 3130 stated that in the interjaretation of statutes <:-ourts always grresume that the legislature inserted every part thereof for a pure and the iegislative intention is that every gaxart of the etatute should have effect. Hence, the /2% §.€£<}<j.~'.§\iO. i.i~£>'.;fI;}3U"?"

pmmsicsn that is available to the lanciiord "under 40 to seek possession of vacant buiidmg, sites__;'iji11é3tA_ interpreted that the Act 3.8 in fact appiicabipt:2'_::§11¢h::sit¢s; V. othenxzisﬂ. the said proxrlsion Wtouidu "1weeim}da.f1§; Under the cimumstanccs, the coﬁtxgﬁﬁon thaaﬁ; 4() '<, would be applicable oniy Wh€£'f§""1£:}E-i€!'ﬁ is and not ottxerwise is mjected. . V V' 'V V

27. As land" is nut, defined 1111---,t:i'Vc:f _'<tVi;€" Eﬂciiixition of premises in secacm. and any ma not used. tifir_ But the deﬁnition ofb11iki111g in Se<":t1oziVV3.£_é_§ v<3t'V't.*_1£A'3?§«:c:'¥:. §i1cludes garden area appurtenant to a buiidmg which is zxothmg but _.v{As1z1V<:i«,. "'£"I:g_ere1'<)re, any iand not used $302" agncuimrai or gmunds appurtenant 1:0 a building can V _ be which can be used as a building site for the h ._ pt31}3Qsec: 0f putting up a consﬁuctjon either for use as a _' 2'-zsiécixcx: or for an}; ether purpose within the meaning of " ~»Srf<3ﬂon 40 of the Act. if possession. of vacant iazad V appurtenant to a building is sought by the petitioner for the purpose of putting up constxucﬁon, than in that case that weuld bit severance of 1:313 vacant Land from the resyf 'ihﬁ

-/ y }'iHi~%.§'.i"»iC>. lib. ZGU I' prem1se:s comprising of the huilciing in wincla event thecourt wouid have to direct sevcrancze and pass all orders. 031 th& other hand. the possession of"-'tiﬁe 1 V' is also sought which also incide-.ﬁtaﬂy« has gaxtitrns appurkcnant to it, than JcaTTs7.'e cannot be invoked at aii' oihcr * %' premises let out is vacagigt not uséﬁ for agncultuxal Land is reqvmrcd for the purpose than in that event then: there is no S€vCraﬂV€:¢"Q#. 633111115: vacant land is ii: __jbe:<:.t1on 40 can be invoked or omcmsé, learned Senior Counsel for the :;s"pQndeni~ isﬁccepicd, then in all cases whcm entire 'V Seaman 40 cannot be invoked at all A Wcruid have to invoke some other provision unzri-::_r tjzici er any other law. Such a discnmmaticm $ituati-on when the entire iami is and Wizﬁtia pornon ofths {and is Iﬁqllifﬁd is net envisaged by the VM .V makers.

2.38. At this stage it would be of rtzicvance to note that under the Rent Contml Act of 1961 Section 2i{1}{1} 85 (131; Wczzm /i/'*' .» «:,,..__..

m«ii»<;£~'.i'~¢r:>. 136. ZCJU?

.... 2:3 ....

required and csmy a poraon oi the premlses compr1,smg_;3fthe vacant land is mquired, then in that case even if t.f1;ii--. iami is apgnurtenant to a buiiding, Sccticn 40 be:

Where there can be severance bctwcen VV poman (buildingi which the mspoﬁde:;tTcamd_:er,§;a:

vacant land which would be Ab-yxtiac p11'i, 111;: a construction. But if in ..f:t1c vavtg,-ant land, which is the subject of where there:

would be no sc1Icrance,VV-i1£_:thatA&eyeiit,;. iciéititioner cannot be driven to VV any other forum and under ctfier :50. In £njs'cx>xii::>ét.§t" be of szguma' Doc to 2101;: that Sccﬁgoﬁl "40 t:>é"gii::s;__\nz*1t7t1 a 11on~obsta11tc clause. Section 2? » mutuaiiy exciusivc and in the absence of ;}ii§visid1'£§_v~in'f11§';nature 0i'.'::3eci.1<;:I1 21{1)(1p an gm; of the 196 1 Ac f," Hamataka Rent Act 1999., Section 40 is the unly prqvisicnn avaiiabia fbr a petitions: to seek possession of the giitxiiisss comprising of vacant Land. 'l'hcreI'br::, both the " " Conditionﬁ menitianed in Section 41.} namely the readiness and wiﬂingzmss of the peﬁtioncr to commence the Work and that the severance of the vacant iand from the rest of the premises will not cause any undue hardship the ;*i}{K§:'.NC>.i.$t>.;{'UUi .. 2,3 ..

respondent are not manciatozy eondxttons, but the second COI1d1t'IOII would be apphcable dependmg upon the neeei or the petitioner and the facts and eneumstances V V

31. As aireariy observed if the entjxe vaotisat * required by the petitioner, there cannot' be K x the vacant land from the rest of the that 311} wouid not mean that __4U is xxmt a--. L' petltioner. The said --11_:1ust.' xzoiterpreted purposefully' with the intention of the legzsiatiire to 'i%e~;m:"'mj.-2 petitioner to obtam pOSS€':S'.3:{()1"1 or premises of. Land. Thereiizxxe, the use of the Word "':a3:d"" betweeﬁ two conditions mentioned as not = V. ie.....d1s3une'o.ve and the only mandatory eoraziiiiotie that the petitioner must be ready and Wxihng to enmmenee.V."iJ1e1= work of construction on the vacant land for j Iioseeesion is being obtained fzom the mspondent and ,Whe1:; oﬁiy a portion of the premises comprising of vacant required that the pnxxcipie of severance Wouid appiy.

Vt ""§:$11t in the instant case since the ent:1re vacant 1331:}, 15 required by the landiord tor guttmg up a commercial compiex, the question of severance wouid not anse. ﬁKRE.NO.iJb.5UUf _ Z; , _

32. The next point to be considered is regard yo me appiicaébiiity of Kent Act, 1999 to Ima:r.-residential SIIICC it has been vehcmcntiy argued that smcg_.~€§;é . does not appty to a non--I'csidenU,a.Ji>AA»p§femig§éS' premises havmg 3. plinth area 01 for commcrclal purpose and .S1';:tg:c iii vg;;;st:,'§ Land has bmn used for non--Ies1;i&2:jiita:l "thé}sa1d Act is not appncabie. in -'_;c>t'j.cfrV11i::'< ..s.aid«.content1on, strong Ivciiancc has bee11VpiaCcd_o_1 1' court in the case of Chen1;s£cf;;iri sv--S..§Sam3a and othexs re;3orte(iV in the said case, it was not 111 40 ft.)-1120 it. was leased to the_Iespdn{i611t_£;s Amfacaiﬁt land to run a umber depot at cvkfﬁoa---peﬂtion was filed under the 1961 Act befdm _tm§ in I-ii<I(_'l.i'4o.294/89 which was dismissed 26.53.1995 by ncgativmg the ground urged by tﬁc .p§:£1't1'bn6r seeking eviction. The Jcgal representatives I Lt«.*¢1Ae petitioner {Red a revision petition in Kent l~éi;véiiuc.No.{)8f96 Invoking section 30 of the 1961 Act.

" the pcncicncy 01" the sand revision petition, the 19f31 Act was repeated and the respondent also {had on 1é$.2.i993r*'. The legal reprcsentatjves of the respondent Wazm brougitlt 011 Iecoxtri and the Rent Act 1999 031116 into force on .3Z{.1f2;.2()iJ1. f/*' réiifiii .1130 . 136 . .>;5%;}£}'§"

The reason beimg that the concept of "pimt.t1" is only with I'€f#3I'{':11(?C to a builcimg and not with refexence to vacant land. in View of the above decision such a 1est11C'éﬁ§e' to the word "premises" has to be given in 2'{i33i9} " '' reading down its meaning. cat the Word "pmmises" means {i} a buiiding as {ii} any Land purpose.

Therefoie, the cqncept as a Standard 01'? ¥'="&.e:3'!.'eil>3I;1'311ce " 'jfo.r....f«exci11$ic3+13. of the g;"';Ct:,"'t.:J;§1c the word "premises" in

3.-§ectio1:tV i»2(i3}(g;) is oontext of a building as deﬁned in c1a1;se(a)"" not any vacant land not used in which the concept piinth area izef A;T§1i..be appiicable' 'i'herefore, the argument of ££1e ;ea' for the respondents that by vim ' 1e of Sec1io;1ie?:(3§(g} of the Act, the Act is not applicable to the ff ~ ,ti%.V1c£t'¢a.¢oi' the pre-zsent case cannot be amepted. The above 1£1§61'pI'€t€1ﬁOI3 is also in consonance with the abject and puzpose euf Section 41.} at the Act The said fymvlsion is om? in the context of "vacant buiiding sites", where any premises comprises of vacant iand, W re the §~1i<ilr<;t9.§\iO. 136. 2f{§U"§ __ 34$; ..

concept of area is not appiicable at ail. ._a restrictive interpretation has to be given tn) sec' _ the Act in the context of plinth area to ho£d'*tt1é§i.. woaﬁé premises in the $a.1d ciause is 3 and not 1:0 vacant land, ()ti1e;_wise '.':-$e{:t1on _ would become redundant. the uee of the premises ._;,fv<;>;?£=;;é«efssio:vv1'AAcVev.n be for residence or for any' 01;f:_1ef includes 11on~ residential or a provision in statute canhot .§5e.te'v.:maVke another provision in the xfexjvrsa' me'i*egi'tz.1:1dant, in order to give effect to:

Section pf ".=1 _jzest11cnve meaning to the word "pre,n_§iees?' in Seetien 2(.'3}(g) has to be given so as to exciude its scope by reading down the word, L"pxse:;p;:?sés;-#3132 2(3}{g) of the Act.

34. _.~i£o_ri§:e{rer, strong reijance was placed an the ' "~ebeerve1£ic§;t3.s of this ccurt in the above noted €i€CiSI(}I1 of £1313 However, What is relevant to note is that the above oiiservaﬁons were net made in the ccntext of Seetitzm 40 of the Kent Act 1999, but the said case was 111 the context of an evicticm petiﬁon filed under {Section :21£1}(a§{b}(c) and (it) of the 196i} Act as amended under the 1999 Act. In View er" a /« X ﬁRxk.No.:56.zGQ?

_.ji....

Ileumomous reading of Seaman 2{3}{g} with Section 3(1} read with S{':CUOI1 3(3) and Secttnﬁ 40 of the Kent Act, 19E%¥'§;»Tit IS hem. mat the embargo under Esectioxx '.£{3}(g} of in the context of buiiding having a pimth :10: V' context of Section 40 of the Act'J\;7»i1'iCi1._dcals land.

35. Another reason for so kioitimg 15} thai itself speaks about emctionv 91:3 ':i:i1*<a xes1'dér1c~<:" or tier any other purpose. If the c&:3$n;_i:::1ii<r'V:"1:"oi"_«i"_i::f»lﬁézgrned counsel for the responder}: acce§g3't.cc L 'jEf;cf1"1;i;:5 "Whether for use as a Iizsidrmcé {Hf-«.1i51*Va1'a§.r'Vi;tj1erfpu.1"posc" cannot be gven full meaning. ' r'f*4.o;:1~:i':$i:i,c'iia.'§:is':1' purpose" or a "oommcrciai purfmaej" is impiieti u;f}.c£ér Section 4() of the Act and vacant ggﬁdéwtcéii B"€:. us€:d Vi'6'rA'putti11g up a bmldmg to be used. for i9e$:(iie2:ii:1aa$g' for any other p11rposc affcr possession is obtgmed . inc petitioxzer Imcier the said Section In this c0I1te§:t,H_A'it is reievant to note that under seamen 33:} 01 the Ac;t "ti6ﬁnc:s residential user or purpose of I'€3Si(i€I1C€ ta ' ijilciildﬁ icztting out for nmmng a pubiic: institution the: saici deiimition is an exclusive one and broad in nature. However, {here is no definition of 110I1~'I"¥ZSidC}C1¥Ci3i purpose or user in $5' hRKE.N0.iJb.ZUu! ._ 33 ._ the Act. Hence, the contenﬁon zegardmg I1on~app£i(:ab1j;t§,r of the Act to m:m--rcs1denﬁ.a1 pmmjscs except those bcibké mts is accepted only In the context 0: ' in the context of Secuon 40. mxs, " V' relevant inasmuch as Section 40 vacant Eanci Where concept of abxsr;'I1t.

36. It 13 also s1g113ii(';a11t bee' tibia IS with regard. to pI'Ot€C'i1OIi of eviction. Sections 2:38, :.»§9;$5_(}'_' an<:i L$1:. (Sf the patitioncr to rceovejf §:'fjjo$$€v$s1on'._"VdiT V Vthe premises. Sinniarlyr, , With special prevision for recovery of" --pGss§:$s1O1'1 iii certain cases. Whemas under

.__the ﬁétiiu-*-.-cmcr is cast with the heavy mnﬁcn of for seeking "cvlction" oi the respondent mm V23, 29, 39, 31 and Sections 3? to 40, :2' me speéiai Etéxcixmstanoes exist, then the petinoncr has the right All » ta segk "possessxon" 01 the zespondentod pmmxscs. 'rim ngbat it; smic passesssion under mrtam cimuinstmxccs is quite V hyvﬁjﬁezent fmm me right to seek eviction 01: a respondent. 11' certain Cﬂllfiﬂgﬁilﬁiﬂﬁ exist or them are czrcumstaxaces which .49....

enable a ptutzaner to seek p0SS€:SS1OI} oi the mapondtimtad w:em1ses, than the manager can invoke the ts,-mvisions $9/' /.

HHRH.No.1$b.£UUi under the Kent Act 11:36}: and not by rcsortmg to a;1fy'T di;§1cr pmceedmg. it is in this context: that Sections to be considered as these scctm-113 V ﬁiivpkéd' b' notxmthstandnxg anythmg oo11ta,iL;f1ed..:,'1«1I?r€i£:r '1'l:1eref0rt:, SCCEIOIIS 1:57 to 4U %1a_1'vc ndixagf.


V15 Secﬁon 2.7 and even if a   evict a
mspondent under the    tiévé can S1111
exercise his ngnt  'gcpendmg upon
the CiI'CU]]1Si;aijCE:SiL:.'JI§    $4': oi relevance to
mention   iiaxnataka Act am in
gaaﬂ    Itspectively 01 the Dem:
Act    an ovemdmg the eﬁmt

vis~a-ms Séct1onV14~_ Act which pertains to EVICHQH J " of Ifcﬁpg;-ndci'itsv.......1"«hcrciom Section 40 has to be given its V 3?";~__ regard to the principies of mtnxprefataon oi §statui:e.s..:' it is wail Known that a statute must be read as a whqiie and (ma provisxon 91' the Act shmiiscl be mnsuued with V _ __:§::err:nce to the other provxsxons in the same Act 39 as to maks oonsistant cllactment of the wtmlct statute so as to avoid any mconsxstcncv or mpugnancy exttxer wltmn a seamen or betsveen a section and other parts or the statutg. /ix i'i'}<R};-'.NO. i$%$..ziUU}"

38. in tins context it is relevant to cite the dec1s1on' <§ i'»tne Apex <_:ou.rt 111 the case of Krishna Kumar Rajasthan reported in AIR 1992 SC 17s9 _'§$er:;¢ré;_;uvL"1;:% is-.1 "

stated that at 13 a settled pnncipie (Sf "tﬂa1; ? Where there appears to be mconsistt:né'§r_ in Ai=;ec€"10I3s§"~;,;1:" 2 the same Act, the pnnczple 'i]81'IIiOVH1(_;V!'-1'1'éft couki be foiiowed iii? a~Vo:';i'éng_'~:1éa;i%,§ 'It shga-aid not be lightly' assumed that has glven with one hand, it t0f)k':{%\ﬂfaY V. V pre-vxsions of one section of sgtéitrﬁe detcat those 01 another tmicssiit' iév same. 'Fae Apex Court quoted:V"a1ii;ﬁ;h€:: _.'tt1.c case 01 V¢ nwaufu Vs'; efngjsaéi-e reported in AIR' 1958 SC 255 .. 4. jt has i3c:'<':é:1v.+:".:lf:~2'+e1vz-zci as foiiows:

_V V'ffH2s_a_ rule qr" mnstrucﬂon is wait sewed that £31333 are in. an enactrncrti iwa ;:v:'c:,':'s:'ar.,s;

" whicﬁ be recondied uritiz each miter, they . sh.<,':~u_!§.~ be so irztemreted that if possible 9557992 ' shquici be given both. 1'?u's 23 when is imowr: as 'ifizémle of !m;r?n.en2'91::s cor:~;»*£r1,;c-tion. "

3i.:'~S9';' In fact an the above dccrsmn it is also stated that in u intcrprctatzon oi statutes, courts always pmsnme that the icgislaturc inserted every part themot? for a purpose and ma legislative intention is that every part or the statute should haw eifect. Hencc the pm-vzsmn that 13 avmiabie to ?*/ V' ""2~9iﬁ.

HKMP.NQ.i5b.éUUf the ianctiotd under Sectaon 40 to seek posscssmn oi vacant building, sites must be so intcrpretcxt that the Act appiicable to such sites or othcxwnse. the . would become xwundant. Under 2[3_}{g) of the Act must be harmonized with been done above. _V V V V

40. Moreover, 111 ﬁrm ixxstanfxgaise begins W113) I101}-0§}St£I1It£3 clause a pfcwzswn has to be g1veI:z effect to zrrez spectzise 11:: Section 27 of tneV'A<:'t" svﬁich ifé3"3"'g:;hcra§'"'piti§is1on. The mcanmg 01 has {:5 so as to enhance the object and i11tent 0i thcV sa:£:1._ 1§i'm}1sion consxumng the fact that 11:

" 2 has ésu iagfirerﬁ nd1iig;«c1If<:(:t v1z~a-viz Scctxon iii 91' the Kent Act.

--'n_oit1'§§éction 2;? of the Act as wcﬂ as Section 41101" the 4/ 1§*m.:'ta*egi.i1 ~;£?:§t1%non~obstante clause. Whereas under Section 'V 27 §t'é§.'§c$ ﬁthat "notwiﬂlstzanding anytiilmg to the contrary .,::£u3t1t§1n§9:£i in any other law or contract". under Section 40 it 'h':'s~¥V1éf£iA$ that "notwittzstancimg angrthjng contained 111 Section From a reading of the abcxve it becomes apparent: that Section 40 is a special pmmsion and has an over»r1d1ng eﬂbct v::z~a--v3.z ﬁsicctxfon 2")'. in tact Samar: 2*!' use}! is a special ixmvisaon in the cmattxt 01 general $aW of landlord f'/"

§'ii~éf<.E'.§'\iO. i:5'c>..¢;'{}{)f and tenant: but Sectzon 40 applies onjy in cgﬂam cﬁcumstanccs and therefore, Section 40 as; an effect not only over 56011011 2'? or the Act, but 'éa1s<')f V. context of genexal law dealing w1t__t1....ia_;1d1(ir.d' fe-n'_a;g:1tx.V 'l'i:1crciOI'c, the full etiect of bee" non hﬁﬁ to na~g1v€:;. If' '

41. The use of word_ "s£1a11"___;f£§1s_<3t:.. _a piésaixﬁpudn that a particular provlsien puma fame mfexencc may bev.rebuI;?s::dv. .l:§3r 'c:r;1z%7r"EiQ1:V1:§i?£iei"atio}J such as object and Vctiilscqucnces ﬂowing iI'Om numerous cases where "sh " been merciy cnrectoxy or applicable oniy u11der c£rtz1j.;1 However, 1.1:; Section 40 .__b::: IS the use of word "may". in me:

ctsmcﬁng severance, this makes it épp:éafent« fit 13 only in those casts where severance of me vacant ﬁﬁm the rest 01 1:116 premises is neccssaxy, the ffc::c>i11=i:& may give directions With regard to severance. 'Ai'§1e}:§£:it>rc when: scveran' Cf: of the vacaitat land tram the rest oi m'f'_'t1c pmmwas is not imulreci, directions regaitiing severance need not be gwcn by ma court. Aisol after the words ﬁandlard is mad}? and wxlliag to commence the work", the word "and" is used Ioiioswed by the Words "that this sew: ranct:

% HHKk.NG.ijb.zUUT _. 5/ ..

of the vacant land from the rest of the premises will not cause undue hardship to the tcnanf'. The use ()1 tn:-'--word "and" 11:1 between the two phrases is also not COI1jUIii:):ﬁ'i?é:' do not make the two contimoxis mandatory, h11'£.. ¢:.ni'z1 Vi:.*1ié:"' V' hand, the saga conxijtmn Iefetrmg '''.that. the vacant land tmm the past 03: the --.1}c=fc undue hamlsfnp to ma ~i;_'-3 ﬁié Whén a " V portion of the vacant Land IS iEié)wc:is;e;t,v§ what is mandatory for the --to piﬁxjtcé he is ready and wiiimg to cemmeia-rrve tl:1¢.Wor£:'." V

42. £fi_t5(f_t, the deﬁmuon ciausc begins as "in. thik-ﬁct. uiﬂess:-_ context otherwise mquircs" and

- V. ¢_ a building as deﬁnesd in ciause {a}, , tin' agriculturai purpose, but in the ;£(3}(_g_l, the W-:m:i pnzmgiscs used in the sand pmvui3.ioiV3 hé:$ no reference to land at all, bmause the concept 91' area 1s only in the context at b1111d'mg3 axici 11:31? . Hence the ward "pmmises" in Eitzction 2(:5}f_g) must be u to mean only a busitimg, by reading down the dﬁfillltiﬂlil of premises, by keeping in mind the co text in which Section zgangg is apphcabic.

ﬁKHF.No.:3b.zUU?

._.jEj,_.

43. in view of the above, it is held that ti1e_ non- app11<:ai::1iity' of the Rant Act is oniy with regard to"

comprising of buikimgs excluding phnth jj and therefom fer ail other plemisetg Kent Act' a 'l'hat the Landlord was justiﬁexi Act in the instant case and tf£at_.the §xs.vI1'¢i§1;t:'1o11-TVt)'iM;' 'giexferaigce " , the vacant land fram the tl1c is not a mandatory condmion' the Vvénfxim vacant land is 'l'£1crg:f9}}*r:A.VV 3 are answarcd against the = V

44. Véﬁnsmemd is as t9 whether the pcv{:'zt1;<V'}1":-;eV1* 113% case under Scctien 40 Qf we Act.,-- .111 ._:Vp€'{;1.!_io:i'- has stated that he rcquims the V' . séhéiidtiif. p:f¢f:n3ise?S.V"i6r "putting up a oommcmial complex and the schcduic property. He intends to t\?;€£' fioor conslsiixxg of shops; oﬁice and btxsirsméﬁs cstabiishmtnt on the first ﬂour and that he had .t;r;1étie the uercessaxy arrangements to obtain the neotassary anﬁ licence from the Corporaiion of the {git}; (sf Bangalore. Hf: has aiso stated mat he has suﬂicient funds far the pmposcd oonstsuction and if any atidiﬁenai ﬁnaxxcial assistancﬁ is n*:quirer:1, his ilcxthcr would assist him and that he can also raise: funds from the iinanciai institutions. in HKRP.NG.l3b.zQU£ (utter to clevcinp the propclty into a commercial con1_p.lx§x.¢_' i:)r deriving a btzttxar income, he has sought _ respondent and since the entire vacayxt Athﬁu qjucsijon oi ﬁcverance woulei net

45. =1'i1c respondent in ms ;fai§m§ntV"6t' has however contended tha'~{'i :ffjc' 'not that he as "ready ant; work on the 3035511115 " attempt to get posssession fine petitioner has not categorically? théixced for the prentnscs.

46. _'i'he i1:'n:11$e1I'as PWJ and in his '*--.cvi{iéi1<:£-~.ha$ the entire scbeduiz prencnses in mspomlent 1s required 10:' me: purpose or giuttiﬁg 1;3§'€§;:11:"tn1erc1.ai complex on the entire pmpcrty so as to den*:e"ren3; and ether proﬁts ﬁom pI'OSp€t'-:)ﬂV€ mspendcnts as fine sachedulc pmmlsﬁs is situattzzd in a cammercéal area sﬁanlpnszng of snaps and other busmcms cstaizushmcnts and thai it Wﬂiﬂd be advantageous for hm) to "put up 3 shopping compicx. In omcr to corroboratn his pieavzimgs that his has iiatentmn to put 11}; sheppmg compiex, he has statsei that he has apphed far a sancﬁanad man and izcencc tilt'; E' HKRy.No.1s6.zuu?

., 49 ..

Bangaiore Matxanagara I-'alike {B-.M.l-'} and he has pmductsti the ongmaj Iecexpts rssucci by !:5.M.i' datcct 5.10f2UU€) towards the sarxctwrz me along Wltll the blue print at' submitted netiore B.M.l'. He has further -fi _ B.M.t'.Autt1ont1cs are about to sanencan the .}t1nti~.:§1c£;11::;:é after which he would coinmcncc hence be required vacant po$'$r.§ss1o1i.pi"'the , and that it 13 not possibk: to constfucﬁoﬁ portion of the pmpcrty by way?;t 'an T_t1€HI't;,;Sp011€£CI1t. He has aiso statam that thmugh Nils. ~ .§§i" iI1tf3I'i0I' Licsigncrs as per esﬁmaﬁér. aatéd~ and that bank bajaxxce 01 bis. 1,'I§5,1f)i§"i3aVs !)_ég3nA as ready amount to be invested .. ., it 1;»;-L.a1:=3aQ ave£:tﬁi*'ihat he can T3133 necessary f11't1(iS iimm 'Bank or ﬁnanciaj mstitutxon on the secunty? :51'? am: that his father and brains: of would also ' assisi~.h§:§1 ﬂnanciaﬁy.

"4'i';__ 1:21" order to ccormborauz has deposition, PW' .1 has !5;x.P€:) 85 P?' winch are the engnnai receipt for u '"h;avm;_"; appiieci tbr licence and i:}x.F'8 and P9 am the copies of the plan, Bix.I~'IU is the estimate and l::x.i~'11 is the bank statement relating to the account.

.i'§KKP.NO. iJ55'3.}:.'fUU':'' .. 4"}: ..

48. A perusal 01' the said documents eleariy reveal that the peiritzoner has taken suﬂicient steps Wnéh xegani to"

to put up a cmnnxercial complex on the V' Merely bwause he has not used» the' u mum' g to commence the work." "

mean that the pﬂtitlollﬁl' naive ax: put L' up a COI3.SU'1lCt10l1 on the Section 40 requizes is the satisilf-;a.<»=iiio,1i*.ot{ti1;.e" eeuﬁethat the peuuoner is ready and to er: the schedule premises. 1:.1;he _. fiaef the documents pxndutvied 1 to Vsuﬁfxcient and satistactoty by the that he is ready and wﬁisng to coznmenee Vitxeeﬁeroiiz 111 the absence of any rebuttal .. 4. _by_ me feepviident, the satisfaction recorded by the tztiel" 1:101: reqlure to be interfered with 1:11 this r§x;iei0n.. 'iieeileigniﬁcant to note that the respondent alter a great deizgy the statement oITob_;eet;io11. but did nothing ff meieettxereatter in order to rebut the case of the pctzxuoner or giroduce any evidence to ftlﬁtliﬁ? his: case. in fact the ma} 'comt has accorded in cie1';a1i about this aspect 01 tbeﬂlnatter which shah he advelted to.

ﬁHHy.mo.i:b.4uuz .. 5; ..

49. At tins stage 1t is necessary' to conssder the submxssaon o1"t.£1c learned Senior counsel for the respondent to opporttmlty not bemg given to the xespondfﬁnfé evidence in the matter. in this contcggt it is .nortc" "

that nuuaiiy an application uncicf»._(}11;i6r 3Vl :'a33 'the code was filed by the mapnimgnt aiéjéciﬁog of petition. The said a~pp1ica11on'i'vz§s Which, me pet-moncr med HH:§_i%~1~¢o;'_2c:»;;:v,i}i».2s13s;3:a;;"wmcn revision was anowcd, and theAVmatterA.w$§s«.Vmi:n£.;:1déd' ivvtfic triai court tor re--cons1deratibﬁ«'i;i>§"Voxécrigiéfdi' The Sam Omar was méfibﬁdént bctom the i:ion'blc supmizg~§j;:%. s.1;;T1+?,:§i5:..1930012005. The Supreme Court did' ";1Vét- 3&3; AL%;:ie'«.§xt>c:%c:<i1ngs mature the mat court. ¢_ Undiir ucirciimstances the trial court was duty bound to:

' §i'Gf3C€zi. '§ﬁ71'itL'I"'"'fi_1c COIlSidCI'afiOIl of the case both on the q1ie--st:o::' <Sij--:1i;;¢1{z1ta.ina#oi£1ty as Well as cm meats. It was only on '41?..., that statetment of objections were by the , fcsspgntiént beibre the trial court. The petitioner examined as PW. 1 but saw the counsel for the respondent u '"'ir.«*as absent, czoss-exammation by mm was taken as mi and the trial court 3.11 its juciwcnt has recorded the tollowmg:

"..........F'urther this evidence pmduoed by the pertitisrzcr is nst zrizallerzgszi by the mayzrndent in sprig of severaf dates and he has evaded the z % ﬁkHP.NO.i36.£UU?

W45- Accoztimgly. the issue reganirng maixxtamability h;--:gs_ been decided against the respondent. But with _ ments of the case. despite the respondent 1:_1e~t-- use s1'*«.. the opportunity, 5 find that in the opporhmity must be givenﬁq cross¥~e:-zaiirimeg , petitioner and also to adduee .teJ€'§a.r';V':11e 2113313)} have. Under the cimumstaneesﬂxe to the tidal court with a diI'CC¥1iVOE'1' to the resyondent to; to ieaci evmence if he is so tﬁv:Le'V'tL21et that the case was filed bexbiie 2002 and earher a suit was respect or me same premises.

the trjai is kc) dispose of the case on merits = v. witviiixrx evf'i'o1..1t«;nont£1s iimm the date of receipt of this ' 'V 51. {fie aforesaic: reasons whale hoidmg that the .,ei2ie§1on '};3ea'tion is msmtainable under section 40 01 the Act . on saﬁsiiaction I"t2C(>I'dB(i by the ma} court based 3 7%:

VV the eviction of the petition 011%}; is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial" court with the above diteetions in order it; give another oppoztuxaiiqv to the peutxener herein. 2;//7 f'ii'{}{J':'.§'éO. ijb . .3159! "Q6.

52. if-:11" the aiorvmasd reasons, this rezvlsion pet1ttt$_1'i=is ailauzad inpart. No costs.

KVIP' gm

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court