Bangalore District Court
Shyama Prasad B P vs Ensemblon Automation Design And ... on 2 July, 2025
1 O.S. 2937 / 2022
KABC010116682022
IN THE COURT OF I ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU ( CCH-02 )
Present: - Sri. B.P. DEVAMANE, LL.M.,
I Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
Dated this the 2nd day of July 2025
O.S.2937 / 2022
PLAINTIFFS : 1. B.P. Shyama Prasad,
Aged about 71 years,
S/o late B.R. Puttananjappa,
R/at No.24, 3rd Main Road,
Sakamma Garden, Basavanagudi,
BENGALURU - 560 004.
2. Ashok P. Bhoopalam,
Aged about 66 years,
S/o late B.R. Puttananjappa,
R/o No.29/C, 3rd Main Road,
Sakamma Garden, Basavanagudi,
BENGALURU - 560 004.
3. Chiranth Bhoopalam,
Aged about 31 years,
S/o Bhoopalam P. Srinath,
R/o No.26, 3rd Main Road,
Sakamma Garden, Basavanagudi,
BENGALURU - 560 004.
(By Sri. K.P.R., Adv.)
2 O.S. 2937 / 2022
- VS -
DEFENDANT : Ensemblon Automation Design &
Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.,
Regd. Office at # 73/3, 3rd Floor,
Railway Parallel Road,
Kumara Park West,
BENGALURU - 560 020.
Reptd., by its Director :
Vikram Chaturbhuj Dembla @
Vikram C. Dembla.
(By Sri. K.A.E., Adv.)
*****
Date of Institution of the suit 22.04.2022
Nature of the Suit (suit for pronote,
Suit for declaration & possession, Suit for ejectment
Suit for injunction, etc.):
Date of the commencement of 12.10.2023
recording of the Evidence:
Date on which the Judgment was 02.07.2025
pronounced:
Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total duration:
03 02 10
( B.P. DEVAMANE )
I Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
3 O.S. 2937 / 2022
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs have filed this suit against the defendant for eviction, damages and for mesne profits.
2. Case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiffs are joint, absolute owners of all that piece & parcel of immovable property bearing Municipal No.73/3, Railway Parallel Road, Kumara Park West, Bengaluru - 560 020, measuring 1,000 square feet of super built up area in the fourth floor, semi furnished with vitrified tiles and consisting of electrical and water fittings, toilet fittings & fixtures, aluminum window shutters, structural glazing, elevator and other fittings and facilities. Bounded on East : Railway Parallel Road, West : property bearing No.73/2-1, 3 rd Floor, Railway Parallel Road, Kumara Park West, Bengaluru, belongs to plaintiff, North : void and South : void, which is the suit schedule property.
2(a). The defendant for the purpose of running A.V. Automation Trading business, vide registered agreement of lease dated 16.03.2019 had taken on lease the suit property for a period of 6 years with effect from 01.04.2018 to 31/03/2024 on monthly rent of Rs.40,000/- (exclusive of Common Area Maintenance, Goods & Service Tax or any other indirect taxes which may be levied on lease rental the said Lease Deed by way of ECS/NEFT/Cheque, promising, assuring income by the appropriate authorities under applicable laws for the time being in force) payable within 5th of every following English calendar month to plaintiffs and their respective nominees in the ratio detailed in the said lease deed by way of ECS / NEFT / cheque, 4 O.S. 2937 / 2022 promising to strictly adhere to the terms & conditions of the lease agreement dated 16.03.2019. As per terms of said registered agreement of lease, defendant agreed that aforementioned stipulated rent shall be increased by 6% once every year from 1 st April 2018 and payable by it to the plaintiffs and their respective nominees. Further agreed to pay interest @ 24% p.a., in case of delay in payment of lease rental without prejudice to the rights of plaintiffs to terminate the said lease. Further, rent for a particular calendar month shall be considered as received only when all the plaintiffs and their respective nominees have received their share of the lease rents and common area maintenance charges in full and that any part payments of the rentals and/or Common Area Maintenance Charges shall be considered as failure/default by defendant to pay the rent for that particular calendar month. Defendant also agreed to pay electricity charges, Common Area Maintenance, Goods & Service Tax, which may be levied on lease rental income by the appropriate authorities under applicable laws for the time being in force.
2(b). As per the terms of the said registered Agreement of Lease dated 16.03.2019, defendant had agreed that it shall keep the schedule property, its flooring, washroom fittings, electrical and water fittings, interiors, aluminum windows, structural glazing, elevator and all other facilities in good and tenantable condition subject to normal wear and tear and it shall not cause or suffer any damages thereto. Defendant further agreed that it shall maintain the schedule property, its flooring, washroom fittings, electrical and water fittings, interiors, aluminum windows, 5 O.S. 2937 / 2022 structural glazing, elevator and all other facilities from time to time at its costs, during the subsistence of lease and that defendants shall paint the entire suit property at its cost before vacating the same. Further, defendant agreed to carry out necessary works of repairs including but not limited to structural, electrical, plumbing, sewage, flooring and painting of interior and exterior walls to the suit property at its costs. Defendant also undertaken to compensate for any loss incurred by the plaintiffs.
2(c). Defendant paid Rs.4,00,000/- as interest free refundable security deposit and plaintiffs at their discretion are entitled to adjust and deduct the cost of damages, if any, caused to the suit property including but not limited to the structure, flooring, window grills, aluminum window shutters, washroom fixtures, electrical & water fittings, interior & exterior painting, common area maintenance charges, electricity charges, rent outstanding or any other sum due and payable under the aforementioned Agreement of Lease. Further, as per the terms of said registered agreement of lease dated 16.03.2019, not only plaintiffs are entitled to terminate lease of suit property created thereunder (a) in the event of defendant failing to pay the rents in time consecutively for a period of 2 months, (b) if plaintiffs find that the maintenance of the suit property is not kept properly to their satisfaction, (c) behaviour of defendant or its representatives is not good, wherein they cause trouble to plaintiffs or the other occupants/tenants in the building, (d) if plaintiffs find that defendant is using the suit property for any purpose other than conducting A.V. & Automation Trading 6 O.S. 2937 / 2022 business, and (e) if defendant fails to or refuses to comply with any of the terms & conditions mentioned in the registered agreement of lease.
2(d). As per the terms of said registered agreement of lease dated 16.03.2019, in the event defendant fail to hand over vacant possession of suit property even after expiry of the lease period or earlier termination of said registered Agreement of lease, defendants shall be liable to pay 25% more than the last paid lease rent, for every month till such period the vacant possession of the suit property is handed over by it to plaintiffs and also to forfeit the security deposit. In addition, after expiry of the lease period or earlier termination of said registered agreement of lease, the possession by defendant shall be considered as unauthorized and plaintiffs shall be entitled to claim damages for unauthorized occupation of suit property by defendant.
2(e). After taking the suit property on lease, defendant carrying on business therein, was highly irregular in payment of lease rentals and also other amounts/charges due and payable by them under the said agreement. Hence, plaintiffs caused legal notice dated 01.02.2021 calling upon defendant to pay the arrears of lease rents and other dues or in the alternative to quit, vacate and deliver vacant physical possession of the suit property. The said notice was duly served on defendant. But defendant not complied with the lawful demands made therein. Instead, it has caused an undated frivolous reply putting forth false, frivolous contentions/claims to avoid compliance of the 7 O.S. 2937 / 2022 aforesaid legal notice. As such, plaintiffs again caused legal notice dated 16.06.2021 to defendant under which plaintiffs have terminated the lease created vide registered agreement of lease dated 16.03.2019 and called upon defendant to quit, vacate and deliver vacant physical possession of suit property to them within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said legal notice and also demanded arrears of rent and other dues. Plaintiffs also notified in the said notice that after expiry of fifteen days from the date of service of the said notice on defendant, if it continued to be in occupation of the suit property, its occupation would be unlawful and unauthorized and consequently it is liable to pay damages for use & occupation of the suit property. Though the said legal notice was duly served on 17.06.2021 on defendant and its Director, they have failed to comply with the lawful demands made therein and to quit, vacate and deliver the vacant physical possession of the suit property to plaintiffs within the stipulated date and they have not sent any reply to the said legal notice. Thus, defendant is in unlawful occupation and enjoyment of the suit property. With mala fide intention and to cover up the latches had sent frivolous notices dated 15.12.2021 & 14.01.2022.
2(f). Defendant has no legal right to remain in possession & enjoyment of the suit property after expiry of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the legal notice dated 16.06.2021 caused by plaintiffs and the occupation of the defendant is unauthorized and therefore it is liable to be ejected from the suit property. Besides, as on date, defendant is liable to 8 O.S. 2937 / 2022 pay sum of Rs.6,11,874/- towards arrears of rent, damages and penalty from 01.07.2021 to 31.01.2022 and arrears of maintenance, legal notice charges.
2(g). The cause of action for the suit arose subsequent failure on the part of defendant to pay monthly lease rentals and other charges/dues, commission of breach of terms & conditions of the registered lease agreement dated 16.03.2019 by defendants and after expiry of 15 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice dated 16.06.2021 when defendant failed/refused/declined to quit, vacate and deliver the vacant physical possession of the suit property to plaintiffs in spite of termination of lease. Hence, the suit.
3. On service of summons, defendant appeared before the Court through its counsel and filed Written Statement denying the entire plaint averments except admitting execution of agreement of lease dated 16.03.2019 by plaintiffs in favour of defendant with respect to the suit property and termination notice issued by plaintiffs. Defendant further contended that it is bona fide occupant in the suit property and not violated any terms & conditions of the lease agreement. The suit schedule property is in dilapidated condition and plaintiffs have not bothered about the repair of the said building even after repeated requests and notices and thereby plaintiffs have caused huge damage and loss to defendant. Defendant also issued notices on 15.12.2021 & 24.01.2022 to plaintiffs. But plaintiffs have not bothered and created lot of nuisances causing harassment to defendant. The 9 O.S. 2937 / 2022 disputed termination notice issued by plaintiffs is bad in law, invalid and unlawful. Plaintiffs only violated the terms & conditions of the lease agreement and the lease agreement dated 16.03.2019 is still valid and binding on plaintiffs. The tenancy right of the defendant is still continued and plaintiffs have terminated the tenancy with mala fide intention and without discharging their duties & obligations. Plaintiffs have not approached the Court with clean hands as they have suppressed the true facts. Plaintiffs have not paid sufficient court-fee. The suit is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties and the suit is also hit by law of limitation. On these grounds, defendants prayed to dismiss the suit.
4. Based on the pleadings, the Court has framed following issues : -
ISSUES
1. Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are absolute owners of suit schedule property and defendant is their tenant under them on monthly rent of Rs.40,000/- ?
2. Whether the plaintiffs prove that the tenancy of defendant is terminated as per law ?
3. Whether the plaintiffs prove that the defendant was a irregular & chronic defaulter in paying the rents ?
4. Whether the defendant proves that suit valuation and court-fee paid is not proper ?
5. Whether the defendant proves that the suit of the plaintiffs is suffering from non-joinder of necessary parties ?10 O.S. 2937 / 2022
6. Whether the defendant proves that suit of the plaintiffs is barred by law of limitation ?
7. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled the relief as claimed in the suit ?
8. What Order of Decree ?
5. In order to prove the case, plaintiff No.1 examined himself as PW1 and got marked the documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P20. However, defendant has not produced any oral or documentary evidence on its behalf.
6. Heard the arguments. Perused the material on record.
7. My findings on the above issues are as under :-
Issue Nos.1 to 3 & 7 : In the Affirmative Issue Nos.4 to 6 : In the Negative Issue No.8 : As per final order, for the following : -
REASONS
8. ISSUE Nos.1 to 3 & 7: These issues are interconnected with each other, hence they are taken together for discussion in order to avoid repetition of facts.
In this case, the defendant has admitted they are tenants under plaintiffs in the suit schedule premises.
9. Plaintiff No.1 filed affidavit in lieu of his examination- in-chief as PW1 reiterating the plaint averments.
11 O.S. 2937 / 202210. PW1 has produced original lease agreement dated 16.03.2019 at Ex.P1, which discloses that plaintiffs have leased out suit property in favour of defendant. Ex.P2 is copy of legal notice dated 01.02.2021 issued by plaintiffs calling upon defendant to pay arrears of rent of Rs.3,28,526/-. Ex.P3 is copy of reply notice issued by defendant denying the allegations made by plaintiffs in their legal notice Ex.P1. Ex.P4 is copy of legal notice dated 16.06.2021 issued by plaintiffs calling upon defendant to pay arrears of rent of Rs.5,12,298/-. Ex.P5 to P10, P12 & P13 are postal receipts & acknowledgments for receipt of legal notices. Ex.P11 is copy of legal notice dated 25.08.2021 issued by plaintiffs calling upon defendant to pay arrears of rent. Ex.P14 is copy of legal notice dated 15.12.2021 issued by defendant calling upon plaintiffs to immediately repair the suit property. Ex.P15 is copy of another legal notice dated 14.01.2022 issued by defendant calling upon plaintiffs to immediately repair the suit property. Ex.P16 to P18 are email communications between the parties. Ex.P19 is statement of accounts showing defendant is liable to pay Rs.5,66,874/- to plaintiffs with respect to rental dues, damages & penalty and maintenance of suit property. Ex.P20 is certificate issued under Section 65(B) of Evidence Act certifying the email correspondences Ex.P16 to P18 and Ex.P19 statement of accounts.
11. As per order on IA5, property of defendant is attached in recovery of arrears of rent. Thereafter, on 30.08.2024 plaintiffs & defendant filed a joint memo. Defendant handed over keys of 12 O.S. 2937 / 2022 the suit premises to plaintiff No.2 and 18 cheques towards arrears of rent to plaintiffs. Thereafter, both parties sought time to report settlement. On 01.02.2025 both counsels filed joint memo stating defendant has handed over possession of the suit schedule premises to plaintiffs. On 19.02.2025 advocate for plaintiffs submitted that defendant has not complied conditions of joint memo by not paying the rents and he will proceed with the suit.
12. In spite of sufficient opportunity, learned counsel for defendant has failed to cross-examine PW1 and also failed to lead any evidence on its behalf. As such, cross-examination of PW1 is taken as nil.
13. On perusal of oral evidence of PW1 coupled with documentary evidence at Ex.P1 to Ex.P20, it is evident that plaintiffs being owners of the suit property had let out the suit property in favour of defendant on monthly rent of Rs.40,000/-. As defendant became chronic defaulter in paying the rents, plaintiffs have terminated the tenancy of defendant as per law. As per clause 1.2 of Ex.P1 the agreed rate of interest is 24% p.a. Hence, plaintiffs are entitled for Rs.6,11,874/- towards arrears of rent along with interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of suit till realization. Plaintiffs have prayed for order for enquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 CPC for mesne profits from the notice dated 16.06.2021. Hence, there shall be enquiry regarding mesne profits. As per order dated 01.02.2025 possession of the suit premises is handed over to plaintiffs. Hence, no need to order for eviction and possession of suit premises to plaintiffs.
13 O.S. 2937 / 2022Accordingly, I answer Issue Nos.1 to 3 & 7 in the Affirmative.
14. ISSUE Nos.4 to 6: Defendant contended that plaintiffs have not paid sufficient court-fee, suit is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties and the suit is also hit by law of limitation. But, to prove the said contentions, defendant has not produced any substantial oral or documentary evidence nor addressed any arguments. Even they have failed to cross-examine PW1. Any amount of pleadings without supporting evidence is inadmissible in law. Thus, defendant has failed to prove their contentions. Accordingly, I answer Issue Nos.4 to 6 in the Negative.
15. ISSUE NO.8: In view of the aforesaid discussions, I proceed to pass the following: -
ORDER The suit is partly decreed with costs.
The defendant is directed to pay Rs.6,11,874/- (rupees six lakh eleven thousand eight hundred & seventy-four) with interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of suit till its realization, to plaintiffs towards arrears of rent and maintenance.
There shall be enquiry regarding
mesne profits.
14 O.S. 2937 / 2022
Draw decree accordingly.
Dictated to Senior Sheristedar (now under instructions to continue the work as Stenographer Grade I) directly on computer, computerized by him, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court on this the 2nd day of July 2025.
( B.P. DEVAMANE ) I ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-02), BENGALURU CITY.
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS :
PW1 : B.P. Shyam Prasad DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS : Ex.P1 : Original lease agreement Ex.P2,4,11 : Copies of legal notices Ex.P3, 15 : Reply notices Ex.P5 to 7 : Postal receipts Ex.P8 to 10 : Postal acknowledgments & 13 Ex.P16 to : Email communications 18 Ex.P19 : Statement of accounts Ex.P20 : Certificate u/S.65B of Evidence Act
WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS:
- NIL -15 O.S. 2937 / 2022
DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS:
- NIL -
I ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-02), BENGALURU CITY.