Bangalore District Court
Sri. Gonvindaraju vs Smt. Annapoorna @ Jayamma on 13 June, 2018
IN THE COURT OF XV ADDL.JUDGE & XXIII ACMM:
Court of Small Causes , Mayo Hall Unit,
Bengaluru.(SCCH.19)
Dated this the 13th day of June, 2018
Present : Sri. DYAVAPPA. S.B.
B.A. LL.B.
XV Addl. Small Causes Judge &
XXIII ACMM, Bengaluru.
HRC.No.10024/2017
PETITIONER: Sri. Gonvindaraju
@ Govardhanagiri Raju,
S/o Late B.M. Narashimaiah,
Aged about 65 Years,
R/at N.662, 8th Cross,
Divenarapalya,
Triveni Road,
Yeswanthapura,
Bengaluru-560 022.
(Ple (Pleader by Sri. A. John Bosco)
V/s
RESPONDENT: Smt. Annapoorna @ Jayamma,
W/o Govindaraj
@ Govindanagiri Raju,
Aged about 53 Years,
R/at No.21, 8th Cross,
1st Main, Divanarapalya,
Gokula, Bengaluru-560 054.
(Exparte)
*****
2 SCH-19
HRC.10024/2017
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this petition against respondent U/Sec. 27(2)(a)(h)(n)(i) of the Karnataka Rent Act, for the relief of directing the respondent to quit, vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the schedule property to the petitioner and also claim the arrears of rent of Rs.47,000/-.
2. The Brief facts of the Petitioner's case are as under:
The petitioner is the absolute owner of the Schedule Property bearing No.21, 8th Cross, 1st Main road, Divanarapalya, Gokula, Bengaluru measurement 15x20 feet and it is bounded on East by : Road, West by : Remaining Property, North by : Road, South by : Private Property.
Further stating that, the petitioner and respondent entered into an rental agreement with receipt on 10.03.2013 and the monthly rent of Rs.3,000/-. The petitioner and respondent being the husband and wife and both were dispute in matrimonial life. Further, the respondent filed the Domestic Violence Case against the petitioner and as per the Order of the Metropolitan
3 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 Magistrate to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.1,500/- to the respondent and the petitioner and respondent mutually agreed to the monthly maintenance amount towards the rent as per the rental agreement. As per the rental agreement, the respondent agreed that, she will not claim any maintenance amount from the petitioner, but recently the respondent has filed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition in Criminal Miscellaneous No.112/2017 for recovery of arrears of maintenance amount of Rs.1,11,500/- by suppressing of all the facts regarding the rental agreement dated : 10.03.2013. The petitioner has paid the maintenance amount by deducting the rent and also additional amount of Rs.50,500/-. Presently, the respondent due for a rent of Rs.47,000/- as arrears of rent as on the date of the petition. The petitioner deserves the right to issue 30 days notice as per the provision of law and to claim the rent arrears accordingly and the petitioner issued a notice on 07.11.2017 for quit and deliver the vacant possession within period of 30 days. The notice was duly served and the period of 30 days expired on 09.12.2017, hence the tenancy has been terminated. The respondent has determined the tenancy to the schedule property on the ground utter failed to pay and rendered the arrears of rent and also inspite of informing through notice to 4 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 vacate and deliver the possession of the property, as per the rental agreement dated:10.03.2013 and also termination notice. The petitioner is a senior and he is jobless and depending on the land. Hence filed this petition and prays for direct the respondent to quit and deliver the vacant possession of the Suit property and also direct the respondent to pay the arrears of rent.
3. After service of notice, respondent absent and placed exparte.
4. In order to prove the case, the petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and produced in all 4 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to P.4. On the other hand, the Respondent not adduced any evidence or produced any document on her behalf.
5. I have heard and perused the materials available on record. The following points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim the relief as sought for?
2. What order?
6. The above points are answered as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative,
Point No.2 : As per final order,
for the following :
5 SCH-19
HRC.10024/2017
REASONS
7. Point No.1: It is Specific case of the Petitioner
that, Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife. The respondent has entered into a rental agreement with the plaintiff for monthly rent of Rs.3,000/- to the rental agreement. The rent gets by petitioner to utilize to maintain the civil dispute regarding the property pending before the Hon'ble High Court and in Criminal Misc. No.46/2010, the Court has awarded the maintenance amount of Rs.1,500/- to the respondent, hence the petitioner and respondent mutually agreed to adjust the monthly maintenance of Rs.1,500/- and to adjusted towards the rent. But even though after that, the respondent has filed the Criminal Miscellaneous for recovery of the arrears of the maintenance amount. But the respondent has not paid the rent regularly and due rent of Rs.47,000/- as the date of the filing of the suit. As per the agreement, the tenancy period was expired. Inspite of received the notice, the respondent has not vacate the said property and also in default in payment of the arrears of rent, hence they prays for allow the petition.
8. The petitioner Sri. Govindaraju @ Govardhanagiri Raju examined himself as P.W.1 and filed the affidavit in 6 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 lieu of chief examination. In his chief affidavit, he has repeated the entire averments of the petition and further produced the office copy of the legal notice and postal receipt with postal acknowledgement marked as Ex.P.1 to P.3 and produced one rental agreement marked as Ex.P.4.
9. I have perused the documents produced by the petitioner it appears that, the petitioner is the husband of the respondent. As per the rental agreement, the respondent was the tenant under the petitioner in schedule property and the agreement period in September 2013. As per the agreement, the Schedule Premises was let out to the respondent for monthly rent of Rs.3,000/-. The petitioner has issued the legal notice through his counsel to the respondent on 07.11.2017 and the said notice was served on the respondent. As per the contention of the petitioner that, there was a dispute in matrimonial life between the petitioner and respondent. However, the respondent has filed the Domestic Violence Case in Criminal Misc. No.46/2010. In the said case, the Magistrate was pleased to pass an award of Rs.1,500/- as monthly maintenance to the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent mutually agreed to adjust the monthly maintenance of Rs.1,500/- 7 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 towards the rent of the schedule property. But for the purpose of proving the bonafide requirement of the schedule property, the petitioner was not stating any proper reason. Though petitioner has issued the notice to the respondent, but this case has filed for recovery of vacant possession of property under the Karnataka Rent Act. Therefore, the question of recovery of the possession under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act does not arised. The petitioner has not given any proper reason for the requirement of the Suit Schedule Premises for his bonafide requirements.
10. It is pertain to note that as stated in the petition, the respondent is the wife of the petitioner and also it is clear that, the rent was adjusted to the maintenance amount. Therefore, mere the respondent has not pay the rent regularly is not a ground to vacate the respondent from the Suit Schedule Premises. As per the provision under the Karnataka Rent Act, it is bounden duty of the petitioner to prove his bonafide requirements of the Suit Schedule Premises. Further, the petitioner has not produced any documents with respect of the ownership and rights over the suit property. Mere produce one rental agreement is not sufficient to prove his rights over the property. It is pertain to note that, the said 8 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 agreement is in the year 2013, but the petitioner was filed in the year 2017. There are no any sufficient materials to prove that, the petitioner is the absolute owner of the suit property as on filing of the petition. Mere, the respondent is not appeared in the case and also not filed the objection is not a ground to allow the petition. Without proving the bonafide requirement the petitioner is not entitled to claim the possession from the respondent. In support of the arrears of rent, there is no any other documents and also not examined any witnesses.
11. It is pertain to note that the maintenance amount awarded by the Magistrate for the purpose of maintaining her life, not for the purpose of adjusting the rent. In case if she is adjusted the maintenance amount to the rent how can she lead her life. It is bounden duty of the husband to maintain his wife and also accommodate the residential to her. The petitioner has clearly admitting the relationship with respondent as husband and wife. Therefore mere not paid the rent is not a ground to evict the respondent from the schedule property. Further it is pertain to note that, it cannot possible to adjust the maintenance amount towards the rent. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to evict the 9 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 respondent from the schedule premises and also he is not entitled to claim the arrears of rent. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to claim the relief as sought for. Hence I given the answer to the Point No.1 in the Negative.
12 POINT No.2:- In view of the above discussions, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 27(2)(a)(h) and (i) of the Karnataka Rent Act is hereby dismissed.
No order as to costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, then corrected by me and pronounced in the open court on this the 13th day of June 2018).
(DYAVAPPA S.B.) XV Addl. Small Cause Judge & XXIII ACMM, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE:
Witnesses examined for petitioners:
PW.1 : Govindaraju @ Govardhanagiri Raju 10 SCH-19 HRC.10024/2017 Documents marked for petitioners:
Ex.P.1 : Copy of legal notice Ex.P.2 : One Postal receipt Ex.P.3 : Postal Acknowledgement Ex.P.4 : Rental agreement
Witnesses examined for respondent:
- Nil -
Documents marked for respondent:
- Nil -
(DYAVAPPA S.B.) XV Addl. Small Cause Judge & XXIII ACMM, Bengaluru.