Case Note & Summary
The case involves a civil revision petition filed by the tenant, K.A. Hameed, challenging the order dated 05.09.2013 passed by the II Additional Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM, Bangalore, in S.C.No.1176/2011. The trial court had decreed the suit for ejectment and arrears of rent with interest, directing the tenant to vacate the suit premises and pay damages at Rs.750 per month from the date of suit till handing over possession. The tenant argued that the suit premises were not exempt from the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999, and therefore the landlord should have filed an eviction petition under the Rent Act, not a suit under the Small Causes Court Act. The landlord contended that the building was constructed after the commencement of the Rent Act (which came into force in 2001) and thus fell under the exemption clause of Section 2(3)(g). The High Court examined the evidence, including tax paid receipts and a registered sale deed, which indicated that the building was constructed after 2001. The court noted that the tenant failed to produce any evidence to rebut this. The court held that the trial court's finding that the premises were exempt from the Rent Act was correct, and the suit for ejectment was maintainable. The revision petition was dismissed, and the trial court's order was upheld. The court also directed the tenant to vacate the premises within two months from the date of the order, failing which the landlord could seek police assistance.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Exemption - Section 2(3)(g) Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 - Building Constructed After Commencement of Act - The court considered whether the suit schedule premises, constructed after the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 came into force, are exempt from the Act. The trial court found that the building was constructed after 2001 and thus exempt. The High Court upheld this finding, holding that the landlord could maintain a suit for ejectment under the Small Causes Court Act and the tenant cannot claim protection of the Rent Act. (Paras 4-8) B) Evidence - Burden of Proof - Construction Date - The tenant contended that the building was constructed prior to 2001 and thus not exempt. However, the landlord produced documentary evidence including tax paid receipts and a registered sale deed showing the building was constructed after 2001. The court held that the tenant failed to rebut this evidence, and the trial court's finding on exemption was correct. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit schedule premises are exempted from the provisions of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 under Section 2(3)(g) thereof, and consequently, whether the suit for ejectment filed by the landlord before the Small Causes Court is maintainable.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the civil revision petition, upholding the trial court's order dated 05.09.2013. The tenant was directed to vacate the suit premises within two months from the date of the order, failing which the landlord could seek police assistance.
Law Points
- Exemption under Section 2(3)(g) of Karnataka Rent Act
- 1999 applies to buildings constructed after the Act came into force
- Landlord can file eviction suit under Small Causes Court Act for exempted premises
- Tenant cannot claim protection of Rent Act for such premises
