https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195288 The Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 overrides contrary contractual terms through its non obstante clause, so a subsisting lease does not by itself prevent eviction when the statute applies. Recovery of possession remains confined to the statutory grounds in the Act, and the landlord could proceed on that basis despite the lease. On the facts, the tenant also failed to deposit the arrears of rent as directed, and the eviction order had already attained finality in connected proceedings, leaving no basis to resist eviction. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Mar 2018 11:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195288 The Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 overrides contrary contractual terms through its non obstante clause, so a subsisting lease does not by itself prevent eviction when the statute applies. Recovery of possession remains confined to the statutory grounds in the Act, and the landlord could proceed on that basis despite the lease. On the facts, the tenant also failed to deposit the arrears of rent as directed, and the eviction order had already attained finality in connected proceedings, leaving no basis to resist eviction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195288