Landlord co-operative union sued for possession after terminating the defendant's tenancy; trial and first appellate courts concurrently decreed eviction. The High Court found no substantial question of law, held the unconsidered Order XLI Rule 27 application immaterial, and dismissed both second appeals.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1325 RSA No. 200048 of 2020 C/W RSA No. 200049 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.200048 OF 2020
C/W
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.200049 OF 2020 (RES)
IN RSA NO.200048 OF 2020:
BETWEEN:
B. BHUJANG SHETTY, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOTEL BUSINESS, R/O HOTEL GODAWARI, OPP: CENTRAL BUS-STAND, VIJAYAPUR, AS WELL AS “KRISHNA NIVAS”, BEHIND KSRTC WORKSHOP, VISHAL NAGAR, DIST: VIJAYAPUR.
Digitally signed by LUCYGRACE Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI AJAYKUMAR ASHOK KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
BIJAPUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LTD., OPP: CENTRAL BUS-STAND, DIST: VIJAYAPUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER-586 101.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR R. TENGLI, ADVOCATE)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.08.2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.272/2011 BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAPUR AND VIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.11.2019 PASSED IN R.A.NO.89/2016 BY THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, VIJAYAPUR AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFFS.
IN RSA NO.200049 OF 2020:
BETWEEN:
B. BHUJANG SHETTY, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOTEL BUSINESS, R/O HOTEL GODAWARI, OPP: CENTRAL BUS STAND, VIJAYAPUR, AS WELL AS “KRISHNA NIVAS”, BEHIND KSRTC WORKSHOP, VISHAL NAGAR, DIST: VIJAYAPUR.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. AJAYKUMAR ASHOK KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
BIJAPUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LTD., OPP: CENTRAL BUS-STAND, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR R. TENGLI, ADVOCATE)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.08.2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.274/2011 BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAPUR
AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.11.2019 PASSED IN R.A.NO.88/2016 BY THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, VIJAYAPUR AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These appeals are preferred by the defendant/ appellant, challenging the judgment and decree dated 20.11.2019 in R.A. Nos.88/2016 and 89/2016 on the file of III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Vijaypur (for short ‘First Appellate Court), confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.08.2016 in O.S. Nos.272/2011 and 274/2011 on the file of Principal Civil Judge, Vijayapur, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.
appeal shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking before the Trial Court.
lease agreement dated 05.01.2006 for a period of two and half years (from 01.02.2006 to 31.07.2008) on monthly rent and the defendant has paid the initial deposit with the plaintiff-Union. After the efflux of time, the plaintiff-Union requested the defendant to vacate the suit property, as the plaintiff-Union intends to utilize the premises for its administration. In the meanwhile, the plaintiff has issued notice to the defendant, terminating the tenancy made in favour of the defendant. Since the defendant fails to vacate the premises in question, the plaintiff has filed O.S. Nos.272/2011 and 274/2011 before the Trial Court, seeking relief of possession of the suit schedule property.
the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the defendant has filed the aforementioned Regular Second Appeals.
Court for having not considered the said application and
accordingly, sought for interference of this Court.
question, I am of the opinion that, the judgment and
decree of the Trial Court is just and proper.
has not made out a case for framing substantial question
of law as required under Section 100 of CPC.
accordingly dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the appeals, I.A.1/2020 for stay filed in both the appeals do not survive for consideration and are accordingly dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
LG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the second appeals disclosed any substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC warranting interference with concurrent decrees of eviction.
Whether the First Appellate Court's failure to act on the application under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC for production of the respondent's bank passbook caused a miscarriage of justice.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
B. Bhujang Shetty
Bijapur District Co-operative Union Ltd.
E.S.Indiresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
