Mr.Jai Kumar Jain vs Sri B P Mahaveer Since Deceased By Lrs on 19 December, 2013

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr.Jai Kumar Jain vs Sri B P Mahaveer Since Deceased By Lrs on 19 December, 2013

Bench: Aravind Kumar

                            1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

   DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013

                        BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

                  C.R.P. NO.414/2013

BETWEEN:

Mr. Jai Kumar Jain
S/o Sri Gulab Chandji Jain
Aged 50 years,
No.31/2, I Floor, Park Road,
Akkepet Circle,
Bangalore - 560 053

Also at:

Mr. Jai Kumar Jain
S/o Sri Gulab Chandji Jain
Aged 50 Years,
Shop No.1/2, in property No.1
Mahaveer Mansion,
3rd Cross, Santhusapet,
Bangalore - 560 053                    ...Petitioner

(By Sri S.Shaker Sheety, Advocate)

AND:

Sri B.P. Mahaveer
Since deceased by LRs

1. Smt Sudha Mahaveer
   W/o late B.P. Mahaveer
   Aged about 58 years
                                2

2. Sri Santosh Mahaveer
   S/o late B.P.Mahaveer
   Aged about 25 years

Both are r/at No.1
Santhusapet
Bangalore - 560 053.                        ...Respondents

      This CRP is filed Under Section 18 of Small Causes
Court Act, against the judgment dated 2.9.2013 passed
in S.C.No.2354/2011 on the file of the IV Addl. Senior
Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, (SCCH No.6),
partly decreeing the suit for ejectment and damages.

     This CRP coming on for Admission this day, the
Court delivered the following:


                          ORDER

Learned Advocates appearing for the parties have filed a joint memo, terms of which reads as under:

"1. The Petitioner withdraws the allegations made against the respondents, as contended by him in the Written Statement filed in the Original Suit proceedings S.C.2354/2011.

2. Petitioner requests this Hon'ble Court to grant 18 months' time to quit and deliver vacant possession of the premises without driving the 3 respondent by his legal heirs to resort to the process of execution to seek vacation of the petitioner in respect of the suit schedule premises.

3. The respondent, by his legal representatives, are agreeable to grant 18 months' time to the petitioner to quit, vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises. While undertaking to vacate the premises by the petitioner accepting 18 months' time, the petitioner agrees to pay arrears of rent in a sum of Rs.1,84,500/- from January, 2009 till date @ Rs.6,500/- per month upto December 2013 within four months.

4. The petitioner indicates to pay regularly the rents till the date of handing over possession of the premises will not undertake or create their party rights and/or assign the premises, that apart, set up any person to resist the process of taking possession of the schedule property. The advance of Rs.2,00,000/- will be 4 paid at the time of vacating the premises."

2. Revision petitioner and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are present before the Court. They submit that after having understood the contents of joint memo they have affixed their signature out of their own free will without any force threat or coercion.

3. Learned advocates appearing for the parties have also affixed their signatures in token of having identified the parties present before Court. Hence, I do not find any impediment for accepting the joint memo and same is hereby accepted. Accordingly, order passed by Trial Court stands modified to the terms of joint memo.

Sd/-

JUDGE DR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court