IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4720-4721 OF 2002

N.S. Subbanarasimha Sastry (Dead) by L.Rs.   ...Appellant(s)

Versus

N. Kamalamma (Dead) through L.R.       ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petition filed by Smt. N. Kamalamma (predecessor in interest of the

respondent) under Section 21(a)(b)(f) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act (for

short, ‘the Act’) for eviction of N.S. Subbanarasimha Sastry who is now represented

by L.Rs. was dismissed by the Principal Munsiff, Madhugiri, by recording a finding

that the petitioner has failed to prove landlord-tenant relationship between her and

the non-petitioner (appellant  herein).   The revision  filed  by the  respondent  under

Section 50 of the Act was dismissed by First Additional District Judge, Tumkur and

the  finding  recorded  by  the  Principal  Munsiff  on  the  issue  of  landlord-tenant

relationship between the parties was confirmed.  However, the High Court allowed

the  second  revision  preferred  by  the  respondent  and  ordered  eviction  of  the

appellants herein.  The review petition filed by the appellants was dismissed by the

High Court.  Hence, these appeals by special leave.  

...2/-

- 2 -  

A reading of the impugned order along with those passed by the Principal

Munsiff  and First Additional  District Judge shows that while the Trial  Court and

First Revisional Court, after an in-depth analysis of oral and documentary evidence

produced by the parties recorded concurrent finding that the original petitioner has

failed to prove landlord-tenant relationship between her and the non-petitioner, the

High Court reversed the same without even recording a finding that the conclusions

reached  by  the  courts  below are  perversed.  This  being  the  position,  the  order  in

challenge is liable to be set aside with a direction to the High Court to decide the

revision of the respondent afresh.  

Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, impugned orders are set aside and

the matter is remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal  of the revision petition

filed by the respondent in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to

the parties.  

No costs.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, March 31, 2009.