Smt Rashmi S Holla vs H H Sri Sri Keshavanidhi Thirtha on 13 October, 2014

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Rashmi S Holla vs H H Sri Sri Keshavanidhi Thirtha on 13 October, 2014

Bench: Aravind Kumar

                               1
                                             CRP 161/14

                               - -


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

      DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014

                        BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

      CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 161 OF 2014 (SC)

BETWEEN:

SMT RASHMI S HOLLA
W/O DR.N.SRIDHARA HOLLA,
AGE: 52 YEARS,
MITHRA SAMAJ HOTEL,
DOOR NO.9-1-56-B, CAR STREET,
TENKUPETE WARD,
UDUPI,
R/O SATHYASADANA,
CHITPADI, NO.76
BADAGABETTU VILLAGE,
UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT - 576101
                                          ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ANANDA SHETTY A, ADV.)

AND

H H SRI SRI KESHAVANIDHI THIRTHA
THIRTHA SWAMIJEE,
SRI.SRIPADARAJA MUTT,
MULBAGAL, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563131
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF
ATTORNEY HOLDER & AGENT-
SRI.H.B.LAKSHMINARAYANACHAR,
S/O SRI.H.K.BHIMASENACHAR,
AGE: 59 YEARS,
SRI.SRIPADARAJA MUTT BUILDING,
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY,
BANGALORE - 560018
                                        ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. D V PAVAMANA, ADV.)


     THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.18 OF THE KARNATAKA
SMALL CAUSE COURTS ACT, 1964, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
                                  2
                                                     CRP 161/14

                                - -


AND DECREE DATED 12.12.2013 PASSED IN S.C.NO.52/2005
PASSED IN ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, UDUPI, DECREEING
THE SUIT FOR POSSESSION AND ARREARS OF RENT; AND ETC.

    THIS CRP IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

This is a tenant's revision petition challenging the correctness and legality of the order of ejectment passed against the petitioner-defendant dated 12/12/2013 in S.C.No.52/2005 by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Udupi.

2. The learned advocates, having addressed arguments for some time, have filed a joint memo whereunder it is agreed to by the petitioner-defendant to quit, vacate and handover vacant possession of the suit schedule property, if two months time is granted. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff has no objection for accepting the said memo and granting time to petitioner to vacate and handover possession.

3. The joint memo is duly signed by the power of attorney holder of the petitioner, Sri. Ramachandra Bhat, and Sri. H.P.Lakshminarayanachar, general 3 CRP 161/14

- -

power of attorney holder of the respondent/plaintiff. Both the parties have signed the joint memo and they submit without any force, threat or coercion and out of their own free will and volition they have affixed their signatures. Hence, same is hereby accepted. Order of the Trial Court insofar as decreeing the suit for ejectment is concerned, is affirmed and time granted by the Trial Court stands extended by two months from today.

4. Petitioner shall file an affidavit within one week from today undertaking to quit and handover vacant possession of suit schedule property within two months from today as agreed to under the joint memo filed today, without driving respondents to file execution petition. If such an affidavit of undertaking is not filed, Registry is directed to list this matter on 20/10/2014 for further orders.

Accordingly revision petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Rd/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court