P. KRISHNAIAH SETTY Vs. A.V. LAKSHMANA RAO AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions arise out of proceedings under the Mysore House Rent Control and Accommodation Order of 1948. The petitioner in both these cases is the owner of the premises described in the schedule thereto, comprising of shops and dwelling portion and the respondents are the tenants of different portions thereof. The petitions were filed for evicting the respondents on the ground that the premises were required for the bona fide use and occupation by the owner himself. The House Rent Controller found in favour of the petitioner and directed eviction; but on appeal the Appellate Authority reversed the order and dismissed the petitions on the ground that the notices to quit were invalid in law.

(2.) THE first of these petitions C. R. P. 334/ 51 -52 arises from H. R. C. 20/49 -50 filed by the petitioner against the respondent. Lakshmana Rao, the respondent took the lease of the portion of the property on 6 -3 -1944 from Thimmaiah and Nagappa, the mortgagees with possession for a period of 11 months on a rental of Rs. 13/ - per mensem. After the expiry of the term of the lease the rent was raised to Rs. 15/ -per mensem and the respondent continued to be a tenant from month to month paying the stipulated rent.

(3.) ON 11 -8 -49 the petitioner gave notices to both the respondents determining the tenancy and demanding possession of the property. The notice to Narasimha Naidu stated that the tenancy had been terminated on 31 -8 -49 and the property should be delivered to the owner on the morning of 1 -9 -49. Likewise, Lakshmana Rao was also served with a notice determining his tenancy on 5 -9 -49 with a demand to put the petitioner in possession of the property on the morning of 6 -9 -1949. Both of them denied the right of the petitioner to determine the tenancy, whereupon eviction proceedings were started.