- (1.) This appeal brings under challenge the validity of the order of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in H.R.R.P. No. 1256 of 1995 on February 22, 1999 allowing the revision filed by the respondent (respondents 1 to 3 are avatars of the same company and are referred to as, 'the respondent') and dismissing the eviction petition filed by the appellant.
(2.) The appellant is the landlord of premises being Chamber No. 12/1, Primrose Road, Bangalore (for short, 'the premises') of which the respondent is tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 1800/-. The appellant filed eviction petition seeking eviction of the respondent on two grounds but only one ground under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') survives - he reasonably and bona fide requires accommodation for his personal occupation, both for residence as well as for professional requirements. The respondent contested the petition denying the personal requirement of the appellant being a big house has enough accommodation for his residence and his professional activities.
(3.) On considering the evidence placed on record, the learned Rent Controller found that a case under Section 21(1)(h) was made out and ordered eviction of the respondent on July 5, 1995. Aggrieved by the said order of the learned Rent Controller, the respondent filed revision before the High Court which was allowed by the impugned order. It is against that order that the appellant is in appeal before us, by special leave.;