Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka rent control act 2001 section 33 notice of creation and termination of sub tenancy Page 3 of about 583 results (0.194 seconds)

Dongrichand Hanjrimal JaIn Vs. Shah Trilokchand

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1997KAR1119; 1997(2)KarLJ399

..... impugned orders passed by the courts below and consequently allow h.r.c.no.65 of 1978 filed by the petitioner under section 21(1)(h) of the karnataka rent control act. the respondents are directed to vacate and hand-over the vacant possession of the petition schedule premises to the petitioner on or before 31st december, 1997. the ..... the hon'ble supreme court in the above judgment.11. it has to be borne in mind that the requirement of the landlord under section 21 of the karnataka rent control act is of recurring in nature. if the landlord's need is negatived at a particular time, it cannot be negatived for all time to come. in seethal ..... the landlord on the ground that the acknowledgement of the notices issued demanding arrears of rents under section 21(1)(a) of the rent control act has been misplaced and after getting the eviction petition withdrawn, the landlord sent fresh notice demanding the arrears of rent and filed the eviction petition on the said cause of action. the cause of .....

J.K. Rama Rao Vs. Smt. Indira Deenadayalu Naidu and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2003KAR2218; 2003(5)KarLJ532

..... compromise order that had been entered into between the parties by order dated 8.9.1989 passed in hrc 10649/1987. the rent control court while allowing the petition filed by the landlord under section 21(1)(j) of the karnataka rent control act, that is one for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction with a right of re-entry to the tenant had granted one ..... absolutely no scope for interference or modification of the order passed by the executing court by this court in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction under section 46(1) of the karnataka rent act, 1999. the petition to say the least is most frivolous and i am of the view it is clear instance of the abuse of the process of the court.14 ..... shylendra kumar, j.1. this revision petition filed under section 46(1) of the karnataka rent act, 1999 is directed against the order dated 17.4.2002 passed in execution no. 10098/1999 by the xv additional small cause judge, mayo hall, bangalore (scch no. 19). the .....

Divisional Traffic Officer Ksrtc, Mysore Division Vs. K. Ramaiah and o ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2007(4)KarLJ481

..... directing to vacate and hand over possession is without any authority as the proceedings has to be initiated under the provisions of section 21 of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 and not for any other reasons. accordingly, it is his submission that the order of the district judge setting aside the order passed ..... with the provisions of the transfer of property act and also under the provisions of the act.10. further, counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that this property has been allotted to him by the rent controller and no such notice is prescribed under the karnataka rent control act regarding termination of tenancy and the order passed ..... occupation does not become authorised merely because protection was given against the arbitrary evictions under the provisions of the rent control act earlier. the court has further noted that under the provisions of the act it is not contemplated that any prior notice of termination be given to an unauthorised occupant.20. in these .....

Maruthy Enterprises Vs. the Corporation of City of Bangalore

Court : Karnataka

..... . suresh's case, we direct the authorities to reassess the tax liability of the petitioner on the assumption of the applicability of the karnataka rent control act, the standard rent being the basis for determining the tax liability and refund to the petitioner the excess of the tax received if any for a period of three ..... illegally and unauthorisedly. it is further submitted that the respondent be directed to determine the ratable value of the building in accordance with the provisions of the karnataka rent control act or in the alternative restrict the arv of the building at rs. 7,500/- as is claimed to have been determined by the petitioner under annex- ..... petitioner was liable to pay property tax at the annual rental value to be assessed by hypothetically applying the principles of the karnataka rent control act and not on the basis of actual rent received. while confirming the judgment of the learned single judge in m/s. rajatha enterprises's case and not approving the judgment in j .....

Venkateshvarulu Vs. Deputy Commissioner

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1990KAR989

..... the date of construction of the building for the purpose of sub-section (2) of section 2 of the rent control act, it would completely defeat the objects of the karnataka rent control act as to control of rents and eviction and leasing of buildings and it would also result in postponing the application of parts ii and iii ..... phase, j.p. nagar, bangalore. the 3rd respondent is the owner of the premises.2. a proceeding under section 10a of the karnataka rent control act (hereinafter referred to as the 'rent control act') was initiated against the appellant-petitioner on the ground that he had occupied the premises in question which was governed by the provisions of ..... with the sanctioned plan and does not contravene any of the building bye-laws. whereas the objects of the karnataka rent control act are to control rents and evictions and leasing of buildings and also to control rates of hotels and lodging houses and to provide for certain other matters connected thereto. thus the objects of .....

Smt. Lakshamma and ors. Vs. B.P. Thirumala Setty and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2005KAR5599

..... n.t. bharathi v. hotel olympia, 1990 sc (supplement) scc 213masthan v. sirajuddin and ors., 2002 air kant h.c.r. 11548. they deal with karnataka rent control act and the rent act of other states. the gist of the above cases is whenever the tenant was required to prefer a revision or to prosecute the revision, unless until his revision ..... landlords and the tenant, we would like to take up the questions of controversy, one by one.section 70 of the new rent act reads as under:repeal and savings (1) the karnataka rent control act, 1961 (karnataka act 32 of 1961) is hereby repealed.(2) notwithstanding such repeal and subject o the provision of section 69:(a) all proceedings in ..... of these revisions petitions are as under:2. the respondent-landlord has instituted hrc petition 10115/00 under section 21(1)(a) and (h) of the karnataka rent control act i.e. on the ground of tenant being a chronic defaulter and also for bonafide and reasonable occupation on the ground that his brother is no more .....

D. Saraswathi Vs. Rent and Accommodation Controller

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1992KAR1706; 1992(2)KarLJ400

..... had obtained possession of the premises by virtue of an order passed by the court on the ground under section 21 (1)(h) of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 ('the act'), the rent controller had no jurisdiction either to notify the alleged vacancy or to allot the premises, the order of allotment being without jurisdiction, is a nullity and ..... to review his order. no such specific power is vested in the rent controller or any authority under the act. section 152 of the c.p.c. which is invoked by the rent controller obviously in view of the provisions of rule 35 of the karnataka rent control rules, 1961 ('the rules'), provides for correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes ..... possession of the premises, but also to show that by virtue of the order passed by the court under section 21 (1)(h) of the act, the rent controller had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for allotment. it is disputed as to when the tenant vacated the premises in pursuance of the said order. however .....

Nagarathnamma Vs. Special Deputy Commissioner

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1991KAR813

..... the order of the civil court passed in o.s.no. 822/1984 and even to this day the premises is lying vacant. under section 4(2) of the karnataka rent control act 1961, it is made very clear that if the building is not occupied in accordance with an order for possession under section 21(1)(h) within a period of ..... an order dated 11-1-1985 came to the conclusion that under sub-section (2) of section 4 of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act) the premises should have been occupied within two months from the date on which it became vacant. if it is not so occupied, intimation of vacancy ought to ..... and was effecting repairs. that would amount to occupation. it does not mean physical occupation. if it is so narrowly construed, it would work undue hardship. after all the rent control act is one to prevent unreasonable eviction of the tenant and not altogether throwing a blanket against eviction.4. mr. p. vishwanatha shetty, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, .....

Venkatesh Pille Vs. Padmavathi

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1987KAR946; 1987(1)KarLJ110

..... section has a proviso which speaks of comparative hardship.so far as the bona fides under section 5 of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 is concerned, it has to be considered independently of the requirement of an applicant for allotment. there is no question of comparative hardship. it ..... commissioner, bangalore & ors., 1981(1) klj 458 it was observed thus :'clause (h) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 21 of the karnataka rent control act, 1961, speaks of obtaining possession from a tenant who is in occupation of the premises for the personal occupation of the landlord bona fide and reasonably. the said ..... judge, bangalore, in hrc no. 2926 of 1983. the respondent is the land owner. she initiated eviction proceedings under section 21(1)(h) of the karnataka rent control act. the family of the respondent consists of herself and four daughters. two daughters are married. one of the married daughters is staying at madras and another married .....

Smt. Swayamprabha Vs. the House Rent and Accommodation Controller and ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1997KAR2440; 1997(4)KarLJ725

..... made by respondents 1 and 3 is erroneous in law and totally unwarranted from the reading of the provisions of part-ii of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). it is the contention of the learned counsel that since the first respondent gets jurisdiction to notify the premises as vacant and allot the ..... the said decision at paragraph-4, it is observed thus:'the proceedings are initiated under sections 4 and 5 of the karnataka rent control 'act ('the act' for short). the authority under the act can clutch at the (jurisdiction if the building is only vacant. it has been repeatedly stated by this court on several occasions that ..... of a tenancy or by the eviction of the tenant etc., is required to intimate vacancy to the house rent and accommodation controller (hereinafter referred to as 'the controller'). section 5 of the act confers power on the controller to allot any vacant building to any public authority or any other person as he deems fit. section 8 .....