G.N.SABHAHIT,J. - (1.) THESE two C.R.Ps. Are by the landlord and they are directed against the judgment and order passed by the District Judge, Chitradurga, in H.R.C. A. Nos. 17 and 18 of 1974 on his file, allowing the appeals on setting aside the orders and decrees made by the Munsiff, Davangere in H.R.C. Nos. 94 and 95/73 on his file, allowing the petitions of the landlord for eviction of the tenants under Clauses (f) and (h), (h) and (j) of the proviso to Section 21(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE landlord having purchased the properties from one Varamaha Lakshamma under Ext. P-1, wanted to immediately demolish and reconstruct a building for his personal occupation. He also added in one case ground of subletting. The trial Court, after recording evidence and appreciating the same allowed the petitions of the landlord on all the grounds. But, where there are two clauses like (h) and (j) this Court has ruled that it is (h) that prevails over (j). Thus, in both cases decree was given under clause (h) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said decree, the tenants went up in appeal, as stated above, before the District Judge, Chitradurga at H.R.C. A. Nos. 17 and 18 of 1974.
(3.) DURING pendency of these appeals, the landlord died and his legal representatives were brought on record as per order passed on I. A.IV. The widow, daughter and four sons of the deceased are brought on record.;