9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 regarding eviction during contractual tenancy.
Summary: The case involved a lease agreement for a cinema theatre construction, where the tenant defaulted in payment and faced eviction proceedings under Section 21 of the Act. The appellant argued that eviction under the Rent Control Act was not permissible during the contractual tenancy period. The respondent contended that the Act supersedes any contractual terms. The Supreme Court referred to precedents emphasizing the applicability of Rent Control Acts over contractual tenancies. The Court analyzed Section 21 of the Act and held that the non-obstante clause prevails over any contrary contract terms. The judgment highlighted the limited rights of landlords under Rent Control Acts and dismissed the appeal due to the tenant's failure to comply with court orders. The Court concluded that the Rent Control Act applies regardless of the contractual lease, affirming the eviction order. In conclusion, the Supreme Court clarified the application of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, emphasizing the Act's supremacy over contractual tenancies and upholding the eviction order due to the tenant's non-compliance with court directives.
|
