Allowed

Ajay R Gowda v. Janaki Krishnappa

Karnataka HC11 Apr 2022RFA/39/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two first appeals were filed against decrees in suits for ejectment and recovery of rent. The High Court allowed both appeals and disposed of the matter on compromise terms, permitting the appellant to retain possession until March 2023 in exchange for payment of arrears and rent installments.

What did the court decide?

Appeals disposed of on compromise: Appellant granted possession until 31-03-2023; established payment schedule for arrears of Rs. 3.00 lakhs and composite monthly rent of Rs. 1.66 lakhs coupled with r

Ajay R Gowda Vs Janaki Krishnappa — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL

¶8

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.66 OF 2022(EJE) C/W

¶9

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.39 OF 2022 (EJE)

¶10

IN RFA NO.66 OF 2022

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

AJAY R. GOWDA S/O LATE M.N RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT TAMARA HOSPITAL(IVF CENTRE) NO.34-3, 10^TH CROSS IST ‘N’ BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010.

¶13

….APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI.REUBEN JACOB, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PAWAN KUMAR M.N, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

JANAKI KRISHNAPPA W/O LATE K.B KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/AT 39, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 052.

¶17

BHAVANA D/O LATE M.N. RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGE : MAJOR PRESETLY RESIDING AT NO.110 MICHIGANT CT MADISON, ALABAMA – 35758 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

¶18

¶19

ARCHANA C/O LATE M.N. RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGE: MAJOR PRESENTLY R/AT 9111 GRACIOUS END COURT UNIT T3, COLUMBIA, MARYLAND – 21045 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

¶20

….RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. SATISH G. RAIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶22

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.08.2021 PASSED IN OS No.9270/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE LXVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT AND RECOVERY OF MONEY.

¶23

IN RFA NO.39 OF 2022

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

AJAY R. GOWDA S/O LATE M.N RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT TAMARA HOSPITAL(IVF CENTRE) NO.34-3, 10^TH CROSS IST ‘N’ BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010. ….APPELLANT

¶26

(BY SRI.REUBEN JACOB, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PAWAN KUMAR M.N, ADVOCATE)

¶27

AND:

¶28

JANAKI KRISHNAPPA W/O LATE K.B KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/AT 39, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 052.

¶29

BHAVANA D/O LATE M.N. RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGE : MAJOR PRESETLY RESIDING AT NO.110 MICHIGANT CT MADISON, ALABAMA – 35758 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

¶30

¶31

ARCHANA C/O LATE M.N. RAGHAVENDRA GOWDA AGE: MAJOR PRESENTLY R/AT 9111 GRACIOUS END COURT UNIT T3, COLUMBIA, MARYLAND – 21045 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

¶32

….RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SRI. SATISH G. RAIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶34

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.08.2021 PASSED IN OS No.9273/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.

¶35

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, M.G.S.KAMAL J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

Heard Sri.Reuben Jacob, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Satish G.Raikar, learned counsel for Respondent No.1.

¶38

This appeal is filed by the Defendant No.1

¶39

against the Judgment and Decree dated 24.08.2021 passed in O.S.No.9270/2014 on the file of Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-66), in and by which, the Trial Court while decreeing the suit, directed the defendants to vacate and hand over the suit schedule premises and deliver vacant possession

¶40

¶41

to the plaintiffs and further directed to pay a sum of Rs.13,18,000/- towards arrears of rent and also directed for separate enquiry as to rent and mesne profits from the date of institution of suit till delivery of possession. Today a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC is filed by the parties amicably resolving the dispute in terms of the said compromise is extracted hereunder:

¶42

MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER 23 RULE 3 OF CPC

¶43

The Appellant and the Respondent No.1 jointly submit as follows:

¶44

1. It is submitted that R.F.A.No.66/2022 arises out of O.S. No.9270/2014 filed by the Respondent No.1 herein in respect of the property bearing No.34-3, 10th Cross Road, 1st N Block, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru comprising of Ground, First and Second Floor with passage totally measuring 6080 square feet. The said suit in O.S.No.9270/2014 is based on a Lease Deed dated 20-06-2009 entered into between the Respondent No.1 and the mother of the Appellant.

¶45

2. It is submitted that R.F.A.No.39/2022 arises out of O.S.No.9273/2014 filed by the Respondent No.1 herein in respect of the property bearing No.34-3, 10th Cross Road, 1st N Block, Rajajinagar,

¶46

¶47

Bengaluru comprising of Front portion of Ground Floor measuring 1143.8 square feet. The said suit in O.S.No.9273/2014 is based on a Lease Deed dated 10-10-2011 entered into between the Respondent No.1 and the mother of the Appellant.

¶48

3. For the sake of convenience the suit schedule properties in O.S. No.9270/2014 and O.S. No.9273/2014 are set out in the schedule below as Item No.1 and 2 respectively and are hereinafter together referred to as the “Schedule Properties”.

¶49

4. It is submitted that both the properties in the said two suits comprise of a composite property wherein the Appellant is presently running a Diagnostic and Fertility Centre known as ‘Tamara’. Both the said suits in O.S. No.9270/2014 and O.S. No.9273/2014 have been decreed by separate judgment and decrees both dated 24-08-2021 passed by the Court of the 65th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City (CCH-66), whereby the Appellant herein has been directed to quit the suit premises and deliver the vacant possession of the suit premises in both the said suits. The Appellant has also been directed to pay a sum of Rs.30,80,000/- and Rs.24,60,000/- towards arrears of rent in O.S. No.9270/2014 and O.S. No.9273/2014 respectively.

¶50

5. It is submitted that both the Appellant and Respondent No.1 have arrived at a mutual settlement of the dispute in respect of the schedule

¶51

¶52

properties and the terms and conditions of the settlement between the Appellant and the Respondent No.1 are as follows:

¶53

a) The Appellant is entitled to continue to occupy the schedule properties till 31-03-2023 and the Appellant hereby undertakes to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the schedule properties by 31-03-2023.

¶54

b) The Appellant and the Respondent No.1 have come to a consensus with regard to the arrears of rent payable by the Appellant to the Respondent No.1 in respect of the Schedule Properties after taking into consideration the payments made by the Appellant of Rs.1,67,82,823/- during the pendency of O.S. No.9270/2014 and O.S. No.9273/2014 and TDS paid amount of Rs.20,98,153/-.

¶55

c) The total arrears of rent payable in respect of the Schedule Properties till 28-02-2022 by the Appellant is Rs.42,16,622/-, out of which a sum of Rs.12,17,523/- has been paid by the Appellant to the Respondent No.1 during the pendency of the present appeals vide Demand Draft bearing No.874159 dated 30-03-2022 drawn on Union Bank of India, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru. The balance amount of Rs.29,99,099/- (rounded to Rs.30,00,000/-) is payable by the Appellant to the Respondent No.1 in 6 equal installments of Rs.5,00,000/- each along with the monthly rentals from the month of April 2022 to September 2022, which is payable by the 10th of the next month (for

¶56

¶57

example rent of April 2022 shall be payable by 10th of May 2022).

¶58

d) The composite rentals payable for both the items of the Schedule Properties is Rs.2,66,152/-, which is payable from the month of March 2022 till March 2023 (13 months). The refundable Security Deposit available with the Respondent No.1 is Rs.13,00,000/- (Rs.10,00,000/- in respect of Item No.1 and Rs.3,00,000/- in respect of Item No.2). The refund of the Security Deposit of Rs.13,00,000/- shall be deducted at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per month for 13 months from March 2022 till March 2023. After such deductions the monthly composite rentals payable by the Appellant to the Respondent No.1 for both the Items of the Schedule Properties is Rs.1,66,152/-, which is payable by the 10th of the next month (for example rent of April 2022 shall be payable by 10th of May 2022).

¶59

e) It is agreed between the parties that the rent for the month of March 2022 of Rs.1,66,152/- (after deduction of Rs.1,00,000/- towards portion of the Security Deposit) shall be paid by the Appellant by 20th April 2022.

¶60

f) For the sake of easy reference, the payment schedule is set out in the tabulated statement below:

¶61

¶62

Month	Rent after deduction of 1,00,000/- per month towards refund of security deposit of 13,00,000/-	Arrears of Rent	Total payable	Payable by
March 2022	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	20-04-2022
April 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-05-2022
May 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-06-2022
June 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-07-2022
July 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-08-2022
August 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-09-2022
September 2022	1,66,152	5,00,000	6,66,152	10-10-2022
October 2022	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	10-11-2022
November 2022	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	10-12-2022
December 2022	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	10-01-2023
January 2023	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	10-02-2023
February 2023	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	10-03-2023
March 2023	1,66,152	Nil	1,66,152	31-03-2023

¶63

g) The Appellant hereby undertakes to pay the rentals from March 2022 till March 2023 (after deduction towards security deposit) and the balance arrears of rent of Rs.30,00,000/- as per the aforesaid schedule after deducting the applicable TDS on each payment.

¶64

h) The Respondent No.1 hereby agrees that except for the arrears of rent till 28-02-2022 and rentals from 01-03-2022 till 31-03-2023 as stated above, there is no other amount due and payable by the Appellant to the Respondent No.1 in respect of the lease of the schedule properties arising out of

¶65

¶66

the Lease Deed dated 20-06-2009 and Lease Deed dated 10-10-2011.

¶67

6. Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to decree the above Appeals in terms of this compromise petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶68

SCHEDULE PROPERTIES

¶69

Item No.1: Suit Schedule Property in O.S.9270/2014 (R.F.A.No.66/2022).

¶70

All that piece and parcel of the property bearing No.34-3, 10th Cross Road, 1st 'N' Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore comprising of ground, first and second floor with passage leading to the property. Measurements:

¶71

On the ground floor, first floor and second floor in all measuring 6080 Sq.ft., with the following boundaries:

¶72

East by : Private property No.431/A West by : Private property No.431C North by : Private property No.445A South by : Remaining portion of the property and passage leading to the property from the Road

¶73

Item No.2: Suit Schedule Property in O.S.9273/2014 (R.F.A.No.39/2022).

¶74

All that piece and parcel of the property consisting of four shops on the front portion of ground floor in property bearing No.34-3, 10th Cross Road, 1 ‘N’ Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-560 010 admeasuring East to West: 43 ft and North to South: 26.6 ft with an area of 1143.8 Sq.ft., with following boundaries:

¶75

¶76

East by: Private property No.431A West by: Private property No.431C North by: Remaining portion of the same property South by: Road

¶77

The defendant and plaintiff have also filed

¶78

affidavit in support of the aforesaid compromise petition. The same is taken on record.

¶79

The plaintiff who is aged about 78 years is present before this Court. She has expressed her agreement with the terms of the compromise. Her presence is duly identified by the counsel Sri.Satish G.Raikar. The defendant is also present duly identified by his counsel Sri.Pawan Kumar.M.N.

¶80

Perusal of the contents of the compromise petition and affidavit are not against any provision of law or against public policy.

¶81

In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the appeal be disposed of in terms of the compromise.

¶82

¶83

Office to draw the decree accordingly and consider

¶84

refund of court fee if permissible under law.

¶85

Sd/JUDGE

¶86

Sd/JUDGE

¶87

bnv

Ajay R Gowda v. Janaki Krishnappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay R Gowda v. Janaki Krishnappa

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

The State of Karnataka Vs Sri Richard Mathew

Sri M Muralidhara Vs the State of Karnataka

Sree Bhagawan Maruthi Temple Trust (Regd) Vs Mr.Tushar Girinath

Ajay R Gowda Vs Janaki Krishnappa

The State of Karnataka Vs Smt Shahanajunnisa

Sri. Shrirama Vs the State of Karnataka