J K Krishnaiah vs Meher Taj on 12 November, 2010

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

J K Krishnaiah vs Meher Taj on 12 November, 2010

Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala

' " ~ {13y._Sr:.s.v.Ma.§3una1.h,
'  ' j~..M/s.4_Nisa1'ga Law

 ' Jurigﬁient 8:. Decree dt.17.

IN THE HXGH COU RT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED TEES THE 12"' DAY OF NOVEMBER 2010

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE K. BHA;;rHAV£:1*sz$;'1f.g  4. _

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.16éo/ 201?)  4'   D  T

BE'I"WE§N:

J .K. Krishnaiahg

54 years,

S/o.1ate Kempaiah,

Shop Premises at

Ground Floor No.14/1, 
Mesha Complex, *
Near T ollgate,

Magadi Road, . 
Banga1ore~560 023.»,  

. . APPELLANT

(By Sri. R.B.Sa1dash_i§ajp_pa7.  ' 

AND:

Meher Ta}, ; ' ~

59~"yﬁarS=   

W',/. Q . Eshafi!111éC,'* ..A

N0. 14/'  i'J[esha'~C0.;h*p1eX,

Ne ar Tonga te, .. _ ' = '

V  'Banga1ore:560.02_3:--,'_ '

for

N This R.F'.A is filed

...RESPONDENT

Associates, Advs. for C/R)

under Section 96 of CPC against the
7.2010 passed in O.S.N0.6519/2007 cm



the file of the XLIV Addl. City Civil 8:: Sessions Judge, Bangalore
(CCH 45} cieereeing the suit for €3j€3Cl,1l"I1(:'l1l. 6: mesne proﬁts.

This appeal coming on forlorders, this day, {.]:';'L'1'._:'.\':>(V).t1]'l'.
delivered the following? 3  

i

i
JUDGMENT

This is defe11da11t's appeal challengiiig'rthe'xft1df.§:neni,..__and Decree dated 17.07.2010 made in OliS~..No.6S-£9'/'ZOO'?loriethe file eiff City Civil Judge, Bangalore city.

2. As per the defendant was directed to \rac:a'te possession of the suit sch.edul.e property. the date of Judgment. It is further entitled for mesne profits from the date of suit _Vde.felnd__alnlt d'eliVers vacant possession of the suit scheduIeeplreniiiseps anr1'(i*th__<:ifev shall be an enquiry under Order XX Riiie i ._ sfrhe defendant and the respondent/ plaintiff are l7__p1'esVe11t bellorethe Court with their counsels on record. =Ct)I11p1'0I11lS€ petition is filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of C' 'I"r1e arties admit and d.£',('.€ E: the terms ofthe Com roniise. I I § '4

5. According to the terms of the compromise, the appellant./defendant is ready. and willing" to vacate and €:le'1iver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises in fa.v~o.u_r..ot' respondent] plaintiff on or before 30.04.2011. HeV_nxn.q;ler:ta~kes "to: _& it pay damages from 01.1 1.2010 at the rateiot and he would pay the same by way of regolarly when it falls due and in the event of co.rri1I1itting'--<:lel'a1,i:.lt payrnent of damages for two is given to the respondent to CX€CUt€.'.th€ diseaseifevenfaheitore"}'.130:O4.2011. The respondent/ rent up to the end of October _:claiv'r;f1VV'\2vhatsoever as against the appellant. has taken back his advance amouritfrom the /plaintiff.

6. coinp1'on'iisepetition is made as part and parcel of this.o1'd_e'1*». -

it compromise, the appellant/defendant is Vv7'ipgranted tirne "deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule

4. favour of the respondent/plaintiff on or before i':st1bject' to the following conditions:

!

ii)

iii)

iv) that the appellant shall pay damages at the rate of Rs.5.000/-- per month with effect from 01.11.2010 regularly to the respondent/plaintiff as and when it faiis due and in the event of committing default in payment of monthiy damages for two coriseeutivfe rnomhs, the respondent/piaintiff wiil hav_e'_"the[_iVihe.r::;y"e _ to execute the impugned Judgment aifid"DVeCi5_e'eileveni _ before expiry of the time granted byyth-is it that the appeiiant shat} payié'eieetreicityieoi1'siinifttioo'< charges up to the date_*of_ Vaeating.uand""..;d'eiivering "

vacant possefssioh of .tt;he-s'L:'1j_':.'schedule premises in favou:r*ci' / f;

th'ait"'th_xe;Etpfieiisrif' iiotereate any third party right in the suvit _y«pr0pe'rty;

thmﬁheaﬁxnﬁﬁsﬁmimeanamdmmmﬁunmxmkmg to the abbveieffect within two weeks from today. »A:(:'e.r)_V1fc1i._VI:1g«1y*,. the__appeaI is disposed off. No Costs. .;bnv%a."i Sd/-' JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court