N PERIYAKKAL Vs. CO OPERATIVE TOURIST AND TRANSPORT SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been referred to a Division Bench by Rama Jois, J., as he doubted the correctness of the view taken by Malimath, J., in Ex. S. A. No. 43 of 1977 regarding the jurisdiction of the Court of the Civil Judge to execute a decree for eviction transferred to that Court by the Court of the Munsiff which had passed that decree.

(2.) The facts of the case are briefly these: The Petitioners herein had filed an application under S. 21 of the Karnataika Rent Control Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for eviction of respondent 4 herein, the Co-operative Tourist and Transport Society Ltd., in H.R.C.No. 723 of 1971 on the tile of the Addl. First Munsiff, Bangalore who granted a decree for eviction. Later the petitioners filed anexecution application, Ex.Case No. 623 of 1975, in the same Court. During the pendency of the execution proceedings, the Karnataka Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1975 (Karnataka Act No. 31 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act) came into force. The Amendment Act amended the definition of the word 'Court occuring in S.3(d) of the Act. The effect of such amendment is that the Court having jurisdiction for the purpose of the Act in the City of Bangalore is the Court of the Civil Judge, and not the Court of the Munsiff. The Amendment Act also provided for transfer of proceedings under the Act pending in the Court of the Munsiff to the Court of Civil Judges in thq City of Bangalore.

(3.) The lerarned Munsiff before whom the execution proceedings were pending, seems to have taken the view that as a result of such amendment he ceased to have jurisdiction to execute the decree for eviction passed by him and that such decree could be executed only by the Court of the Civil Judge. In that view hei transferred the execution petition filed by the present petitioners, to the Court of the Civil Judge, Bangalore.