Disposed

S Sam v. Smt Reshma Aleem

Karnataka HC31 Mar 2021RFA/109/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second appeal regarding eviction, the High Court of Karnataka accepted a compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. The parties settled a revised timeline for vacating the premises and payment of rent and advance return. The Court disposed of the appeal based on this settlement, rejecting the stay application as redundant.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of on compromise terms; appellant to vacate by 30.10.2021, pay rent, and refund advance deposit.

S Sam Vs Smt Reshma Aleem — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶8

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.109 OF 2021

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

S.SAM S/O.SRI SWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT THE GARDENS 1^ST MAIN ROAD BINNY SONE GARDENS FALT NO.A-004 GROUND FLOOR, ASTER BLOCK OPP.TO ANGALAPARAMESHWARI TEMPLE K.P.AGRAHARA BENGALURU – 560 023 ... APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK K., ADVOCATE )

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT.RESHMA ALEEM D/O.MSA ALEEM AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶14

MRS.KAHIYUMUNISSA ALEEM W/O.MSA ALEEM AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

¶15

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.36, 2^ND CROSS ‘D’ COSTA SQUARE

¶16

¶17

COOKE TOWN ST.THOMAS TOWN POST BENGALURU – 560 084 …. RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI SYED AKMAL HASAN RAZVI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2) *****

¶19

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.06.2020 PASSED IN OS.NO.25905/2014 BY LXXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, CITY CIVIL COURT, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EVICTION AND ETC.,

¶20

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

This is a defendant’s appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.25905/2014 by LXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall Unit, Bengaluru dated 19.06.2020 whereunder suit filed by the plaintiffs for ejectment of appellant/defendant came to be decreed as prayed for and Court below has directed the defendant to vacate and handover vacant possession of suit premises to the plaintiff within a month from the date of judgment and to pay damages/mesne profit at Rs.20,900/- per month with effect from 30.03.2014 till

¶23

¶24

defendant vacates and handover vacant possession of suit premises to the plaintiffs.

¶25

At the instance of Court, learned Advocates appearing for parties had submitted that they would explore the possibility of arriving at a settlement and as such the matter came to be listed today.

¶26

A petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC is filed whereunder parties have reported that dispute is amicably settled on following terms and conditions:

¶27

“1. xxxxxxx

¶28

2. A decree was passed in O S No.25905/ 2014 on 19-06- 2020 granting the Appellant herein 30 days time to vacate the suit schedule property.

¶29

3. The Respondent has requested for reasonable time to vacate the schedule property.

¶30

4. It is mutually agreed that the Appellant will vacate the schedule property on or before 30^th of October 2021 and shall pay the rent at the rate of Rs.25,000/per month from 1^st of April 2021 and shall continue to pay the same on or

¶31

¶32

before the 5^th of every month until vacating the schedule property i.e., on or before 30^th of October 2021.

¶33

5. The Appellant has no objection to respondent’s receiving the amount of Rs.10,09,700/deposited by the Appellant towards the arrears of rent.

¶34

6. It is agreed that the said rents up to February 2021 the Appellant undertakes to pay the rent from the month of March, payable April in a sum of Rs.25,000/- on or before the 5^th of every month.

¶35

7. The Appellant will vacate the schedule property on or before 30^th October 2021 without forcing the Respondent to pursue the Execution.

¶36

8. The Respondent will withdraw the Execution Petition immediately after the suit schedule property is vacated by the Appellant.

¶37

9. The Respondents will return the advance of Rs.2,00,000/- upon the Appellant vacating the schedule property subject to legal dues.”

¶38

¶39

Parties are present before Court. Appellant, who is present before Court submits that he is not conversant with English language, but contents of the compromise petition were read over and explained to him in both Kannada and Tamil language by his counsel and only after having understood the contents thereof, he has affixed his signature voluntarily without any force, threat or coercion. He has also identified his signature affixed in the compromise petition.

¶40

Since respondents-plaintiffs are pardanashin ladies, we requested Smt. Mamatha G.Kulkarni, learned member of the Bar present in the Court to assist the Court by communicating with respondents and she has stated that respondents are conversant with English language and only after having understood the contents of the compromise petition, they have affixed their signatures voluntarily without any force, threat or coercion. Learned counsel appearing for respondents in token of having identified the parties i.e. respondents present before Court has also affixed his signature. In that view of the matter,

¶41

¶42

we have no impediment to accept the compromise petition and accordingly, it is accepted.

¶43

For the reasons aforestated and in the light of settlement entered into between parties, we proceed to pass the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

i) Appeal stands disposed of in terms of compromise entered into between the appellant and respondents; ii) Appellant shall quit, vacate and handover the vacant possession of suit premises to respondents on or before 30.10.2021 and shall continue to pay damages for use and occupation of suit schedule premises @ Rs.25,000/- per month with effect from 01.04.2021 on or before fifth of every succeeding month till he vacating the suit schedule premises; iii) Respondents shall refund the advance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two

¶46

¶47

Lakhs Only) to the appellant at the time of appellant vacating and handing over vacant possession of the suit premises to respondents subject to dues, if any, being deducted;

¶48

iv) Registry is directed to refund the Court fee paid on the appeal memorandum to the appellant by transferring the said amount to the account of appellant within one week from the date of filing of an affidavit disclosing the name of Bank, Branch, IFSC Code and other details, if any.

¶49

In view of appeal having been disposed of, IA.No.1/2020 for stay does not survive for consideration and it stands rejected.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

S Sam v. Smt Reshma Aleem

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S Sam v. Smt Reshma Aleem

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S the Mysore Lamp Works Limited Vs Board for Industrial and Financial

Smt Rathnamma Vs the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd. (in Liqn)

Sri. G. M. Nanjundaswamy Vs Smt. Vanajakshi

Sri Anandakumar Vs Smt Nagamma B v

Sri. Addu Basha Vs State of Karnataka

Ashwini Vs the State of Karnataka