Bangalore District Court
Sri.Nagappa vs Sri.Ashok Rai on 20 March, 2021
IN THE COURT OF XXXV ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH36)
DATED ON THIS THE 20th DAY OF MARCH 2021
Present: Sri.Manjunatha.G.A., B.A.L.,L.L.B.,
XXXV Addl.CC & SS Judge, Bengaluru.
O.S.No.7355/2017
Plaintiff : Sri.Nagappa,
S/o.Late A.Shamanna Reddy,
Aged about 63 years,
R/at No.20, Kathali Palaya,
6th Block, 17th main,
Koramangala,
Bengaluru560 095.
(By Sri.S.V., Advocate)
Vs
Defendants : 1. Sri.Ashok Rai,
S/o Vittal Rai,
Aged about 63 years,
No.16 & 17, 80ft Road,
Opp.IBP Petrol Bunk,
6th Block, Koramanagala,
Bengaluru560 095.
Also available at
#404, Gayathri Apartments
2
Seven Bungalow,
Anderi West,
Mumbai400067.
2. Sri.Indrashena Reddy,
S/o.Thirupala Reddy,
Aged about 55 years,
No.16 & 17, 80Ft.Road,
Opp.IBP Petrol Bunk,
6th Block, Koramanagala,
Bengaluru560 095.
(By Sri.K.N., Advocate for
defendant No.1)
Date of institution of the : 31102017
suit
Nature of the suit : Ejectment
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence : 07062019
Date on which the : 20032021
judgment was pronounced
Total duration : Years/s Month/s Day/s
03 04 19
(MANJUNATHA.G.A.)
XXXV Addl.City Civil &
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
3
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendants for ejectment, for arrears of rent against defendant No.1 and for damages.
2. In brief, case of plaintiff is as follows: Defendant is a tenant of the suit schedule premises. The tenancy commenced from 1102007. At the inception of tenancy, the monthly rent was fixed at Rs.75,000/ and there shall be enhancement of rate of rent of 15% for every two years. Defendant No.1 is liable to pay difference amount of Rs.26,11,614/. Despite several requests, defendants No.1 is evading payment of rent. Defendant No.1 is running a Lodge and Club in the suit premises. Defendant No.1 is indulged in illegal activities in the suit premises. Defendant No.1 is arranging Cabarets, discotheque in the Night City Club. The police have also 4 initiated action against defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 has breached the understanding of the tenancy. The plaintiff wants to accommodate his son to use the suit premises for running business. The plaintiff noticed that defendant No.1 has made alterations and displayed the board 'Modern Delux PG Gents'. Defendant No.1 has sublet the premises to defendant No.2 for running PG, on a monthly rent of Rs.2 lakhs and security deposit of Rs.20 lakhs. Therefore, the plaintiff issued a legal notice on 492017 terminating the tenancy and asking defendant No.1 to surrender vacant possession along with arrears of rent with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. The plaintiff is also entitled for damages from the date of terminating the tenancy at the rate of Rs.2 lakhs per month. The plaintiff is claiming arrears of rent from 182014 to 30102017 for a sum of Rs.18,95,124/. Pleading cause of action to the suit at para No.11 of the plaint, it is prayed to decree the suit. 5
3. It is seen that defendant No.2 is placed Exparte.
4. Defendant No.1 has appeared through his Advocate and filed written statement. It is seen that I.A.No.2 was filed by the plaintiff under Section 151 CPC, to struck off the written statement of defendant No.1 for not paying arrears of rent. The said application was allowed by this Court on 412021. Accordingly, this Court strike off the written statement filed by defendant No.1. Aggrieved by the said Order, defendant No.1 filed W.P.No.971/2020. Our Hon'ble High Court on 1712020 directed defendant No.1 to pay the entire arrears of rent within 10 days with a further direction that he shall regularly deposit the rents that would accrue due periodically. As directed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, defendant No.1 has deposited a sum of Rs.22,42,500/ as per the Order sheet dated 2912020. The said amount is released in favour of 6 the plaintiff. But, defendant No.1 again committed default in not depositing arrears of rent as directed by the Hon'ble High Court. It is seen that from February 2020, till date, defendant No.1 is in arrears of rent. Plaintiff filed I.A.No.3 under Section 151 CPC, to strike off the defence of defendant No.1 as he is in arrears of rent of Rs.9,48,750/. The said application was allowed by this Court on 103 2021. Accordingly, the written statement of defendant No.1 is struck off.
5. Plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.8.
6. Heard.
7. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for ejectment, arrears of rent and for damages?
7
2. What Order?
8. My answer to the above points are as follows: Point No.1 : In the affirmative Point No.2 : As per final order for the following: REASONS
9. Point No.1: In detail, this Court as stated supra, how the written statement/defence of defendant No.1 was struck down by this Court. The plaintiff is examined as P.W.1. He has fled his affidavit evidence. P.W.1 has deposed the plaint averments in his affidavit evidence. P.W.1 has explained in his evidence about the need of the suit schedule premises, breach committed by defendant No.1 and nonpayment of arrears of rent in time. The copy of legal notice is marked at Ex.P.1. Defendant No.1 has replied to the same as per Ex.P.2. The photographs of the 8 suit premises along with CD are marked at Exs.P.3 to P.6. Copy of FIR and registration Form are marked at Exs.P.7 & P.8. It is seen that the police have registered an FIR against defendant No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 188, 370(3), 370(A), 294, 109 of Karnataka Excise Act. The tenancy between plaintiff and defendant No.1 is not disputed. Even before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, defendant No.1 has not disputed about the tenancy. As directed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, defendant No.1 has also deposited arrears of rent, which amounts to admission of tenancy. Even in Ex.P.2 reply notice, tenancy between plaintiff and defendant No.1 is not disputed. Even otherwise, in detail, this Court has narrated under what circumstances, the written statement of defendant No.1 was struck off. In view of the orders passed on I.A.No.3, defendant No.1 is not entitled to participate in the proceedings. No reason to disbelieve the 9 version of the plaintiff. Awarding damages at the rate of Rs.86,250/ is proper and correct. The plaintiff is entitled for arrears of rent. The plaintiff is entitled for vacant possession. Accordingly, the point under reference is answered in the affirmative.
10. Point No.2: In view of answering to point No.1, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs.
Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are directed to vacate and hand over vacant possession of suit schedule property to the plaintiff within one month from this date.
10 Defendant No.1 is directed to pay arrears of rent of Rs.18,95,124/ (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Four only) for the period from 182014 to 30102017 along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of suit till recovery of the said entire amount.
Defendant No.1 is further directed to pay damages at the rate of Rs.86,250/ p.m. to the plaintiff, from the date of termination of lease as per Ex.P.1 -
legal notice till handing over vacant possession of suit schedule property in favour of plaintiff.
11
Draw Decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the JudgmentWriter, transcribed and typed by her and then corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th day of March 2021) (MANJUNATHA.G.A.) XXXV Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of the plaintiff.
P.W.1 : Sri.S.Nagappa Witnesses examined on behalf of the defendants Nil Documents marked on behalf of the plaintiff.
Ex.P.1 : Copy of Legal notice
Ex.P.2 : Copy of Reply notice
Exs.P.3 : Photographs
to P.5
Ex.P.6 : CD
Ex.P.7 : Copy of FIR
12
Ex.P.8 : Registration Form
Documents marked on behalf of the defendants.
Nil (MANJUNATHA.G.A.) XXXV Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru 13