Karnataka High Court
Sri K Vasudeva Rao vs Mrs Mrinalini M D'Souza on 18 July, 2018
Bench: A.S.Bopanna, Mohammad Nawaz
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
R.F.A. NO.975/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI K VASUDEVA RAO
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
R/O NO 23-A,
NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD,
CHENNAI - 600034
REP. BY HIS P A HOLDER
K RAMAKRISHNA RAO
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
S/O K VASUDEVA RAO
R/O NO 1/6 PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560001
2. M/S WOODLANDS HOTEL PVT. LTD.,
NO 5, RAJARAM MOHAN ROY ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560025
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR
K RAMAKRISHNA RAO
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
S/O K VASUDEVA RAO
R/O NO.1/6, PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560001
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI ANANTHARAM G R, ADV.)
AND:
1. MRS. MRINALINI M D'SOUZA
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS
-2-
W/O LATE M F D'SOUZA
NO 5/12, BRUNTON ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE - 560025
2. MR. P SANJAY MUDARTHA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O LATE M.F. D'SOUZA
NO 5/12, BRUNTON ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE - 560025
3. MS. SUNAYANA MUDARTHA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
D/O LATE M. F. D'SOUZA
RESIDING AT SINGAPORE
C/O NO 5/12, BRUNTON ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE - 560025
4. MRS. RITA ANNE COELHO
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
W/O LATE HENRY COELHO
NO 17, ST. LEO ROAD,
BANDRA MUMBAI
C/O NO. 5/12, BRUNTON ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE - 560025
5. MS. MELLENER ANNE COELHO
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
D/O LATE HENRY COELHO
NO 714-A, 8TH CROSS,
8TH MAIN, VINAYAKANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560017
C/O NO.5/12, BRUNTON ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE - 560025
6. M/S. WOODLANDA HOTEL
A DISSOLVED PARTNERSHIP FIRM
WAS RE. BY ITS ERST WHILE
FOLLOWING PARTNERS
NO.72-75, DR RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI
MYLAPORE, CHENNAI - 600004
7. SRI K SRINIVASA RAO
MAJOR
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
RESIDING AT NO 4,
MAGARATH ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560025
-3-
8. SRI K SHANKAR RAO
MAJOR
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
RESIDING AT NO 23-A,
NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD
CHENNAI - 600034
9. SRI K GOPAL RAO
MAJOR
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
RESIDING AT NO 23-A,
NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD
CHENNAI - 600034
10. SRI K LAKSHMINARAYANA RAO
MAJOR
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
RESIDING AT NO 23-A,
NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD
CHENNAI - 600034
11. SRI K MURALI RAO
MAJOR
S/O SRI K KRISHNA RAO
RESIDING AT NO 23-A,
NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD
CHENNAI - 600034
12. M/S. NEW WOODLANDS HOTEL PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE COMPANY'S ACT
NO.72-75, DR RADHAKRISHNAN
SALAI, MYLAPORE
CHENNAI - 600004
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ANAND K T, ADV. FOR C/R1
SRI KIRAN S JAVALI, ADV. FOR R3
SRI RAGHURAM CADAMBI, ADV. FOR
SRI C K NANDAKUMAR, ADV. FOR R10-12
SRI CHANDRASHEKARA K, ADV. FOR R3-5)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 UNDER ORDER XLI
RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 27.02.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.25493/2012 ON THE FILE
OF THE XXVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, MAYO HALL,
BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.
-4-
THIS R.F.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
A.S. BOPANNA. J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The appellants who were the defendants No. 4 and 8 in O.S. No.25493/2012 are before this Court assailing the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2018 passed therein.
2. The Court below has directed the defendants to quit and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the plaintiffs within three months from the date of the order. The plaintiffs are held entitled to damages from the defendants at the rate of Rs.12,00,000/- per month from the date of termination of the tenancy till the date of the order before the Court below. Further, separate proceedings are permitted for the future mesne profits. Though the other defendants have not assailed the said judgment and decree, the appellants herein namely the defendants No. 4 and 8 who are stated to be in actual physical possession of the property have assailed the said judgment. -5-
3. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellants and the respondents No. 1 to 5 namely the landlords have entered into a compromise on 12.07.2018. Though the respondents No. 10 to 12 who are the defendants No. 6, 7 and 9 before the Court below were not parties to the said compromise dated 12.07.2018, when the matters were referred to the Bangalore Mediation Centre, the said respondents No. 10, 11 and 12 have entered into a Memorandum of Settlement in terms of Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code with the respondents No. 1 to 5. In that circumstance, the ultimate compromise entered into between the parties is that the appellants herein who are in possession of the properties would vacate and hand over the Schedule - I and II properties on or before 10.01.2019. The respondents No. 10, 11 and 12 have agreed to assist the respondents No. 1 to 5 in this regard.
4. In view of the appellants agreeing to vacate the premises as agreed, the respondents No. 1 to 5 have in -6- consideration thereof, agreed to waive the damages as ordered by the Court below. However, the terms is also that if the appellants fail to adhere to the time frame as indicated and if they do not vacate the premises and if they drive the respondents No. 1 to 5 to execute the decree and secure possession thereafter, they would also in such event execute the decree including for claim of damages. In addition, it is agreed that the sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore, Fifty Lakhs) which is deposited before this Court in view of the condition imposed herein being a part of the amount towards the damages as ordered by the Court below, the appellants would be entitled to withdraw the same after they vacate the schedule premises on 10.01.2019 as agreed.
Needless to mention, if they do not vacate the premises, the said amount would become a part of the entitlement to respondents No. 1 to 5 towards the damages.
In that view, Registry is directed to keep the said amount in a Fixed Deposit in the Bank to earn the best -7- interest on the same, so that the party who is entitled to withdraw the amount would be benefited by the same. The said amount would be available in the manner as indicated above to either of the parties subsequent to 10.01.2019. If at that stage any of the parties herein who is entitled to the said amount seeks for withdrawal of the same, the same shall be considered only after obtaining orders from this Court so that if the other party has any objections for non compliance of the terms agreed, the same could be taken note by this Court.
It is further made clear that since respondents No.6 to 9 though served are unrepresented and are also not parties to the compromise, the terms of the compromise would bind only such of those parties who have entered into such compromise in such terms.
Recording the said compromise, the instant appeal stands disposed of.
Registry, shall attach a certified copy of the compromise petition dated 12.07.2018 and the Memorandum of Settlement dated 28.06.2018 entered -8- into before the Bangalore Mediation Centre, as an attachment to this order so that the terms explicitly agreed between the parties could be taken note by all concerned.
The appellants in the situation are entitled to refund of the Court Fee in terms of Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act.
Registry, to refund the same.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE SPS/bms