Dismissed¶66

Sri Ansar Pasha v. Sri T Venkate Gowda

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2026RFA/1038/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RFA No. 1038 of 2022 (RES-) | High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru | decided 03-07-2026 by Hanchate Sanjeevkumar J. | appeal under Section 96 CPC against decree dated 09.08.2019 in O.S.No.5293/2015, XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH.No.43) | suit for ejectment, arrears of rent (Rs.1,25,250/- claimed) and damages | monthly rent Rs.24,000/-, advance Rs.2.00 Lakh | Ex.P5 rent agreement proved landlord-tenant relationship | defendant admitted ownership but led no evidence of rent payment | point: perversity/illegality of trial court judgment - answered in negative | appeal dismissed, decree of ejectment, arrears and damages upheld.

What did the court decide?

Ex.P5, the rent agreement, proves the relationship of owner and tenant between the plaintiff and defendant. ¶59

Sri Ansar Pasha Vs Sri T Venkate Gowda — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶6

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1038 OF 2022 (RES-)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. ANSAR PASHA S/O SHEKAB JAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 33, 9^TH 'A' MAIN, BYRAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 072.

¶9

Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

DOING BUSINESS AT ROYAL BIKE POINT NO. 26 80 FEET OUTER RING ROAD PAPIREDDY PALYA, NAGARBHAVI II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 072. (NOW VACATED)

¶11

(BY SRI. RAVINDRA V.S, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

SRI. T. VENKATE GOWDA S/O THIMMAIAH RESIDING AT NO. 26 80 FEET OUTER RING ROAD PAPIREDDY PALYA, NAGARGBHVI II STAGE BENGALURU - 560 072.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. PRADEEP NAIK K, ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.08.2019 PASSED IN OS No.5293/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT, ARREARS OF RENT, DAMAGES AND COST.

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

The appellant/defendant has filed the appeal calling

¶24

in question the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.5293/2015 dated 09.08.2019 by the Court of XLII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City (CCH.No.43), thereby the suit filed for ejectment, arrears of rent and damages is decreed. Therefore, directed the defendant to hand over vacant possession of the suit property to the plaintiff and also grant a decree of arrears of rent amount and damages.

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

For the sake of convenience and easy

¶28

reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.

¶29

The plaintiff has filed suit for ejectment, recovery of arrears of rent amount and damages contending that he is the owner of the suit schedule shop and has given it on rent to the defendant, but the defendant has become a defaulter in payment of rents. Therefore, the plaintiff has filed suit for ejectment.

¶30

The defendant has appeared before the court and filed his written statement. The defendant has admitted the relationship of plaintiff and defendant as owner and tenant. It is the pleading of the defendant that

¶31

he has paid up-to-date rent and submits that the suit is not maintainable.

¶32

Upon the pleadings the trial Court has framed

¶33

the following issues:

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

"1. Whether plaintiff proves that he is owner and defendant is a tenant under him?

¶37

Whether plaintiff proves that he has terminated the tenancy in accordance with law?

¶38

Whether plaintiff proves that defendant is due in a sum of Rs.1,25,250/- till the date of filing of the suit?

¶39

Whether plaintiff is entitled for damages? if so, at what rate?

¶40

Whether plaintiff is plaintiff is entitled for vacant possession as prayed?

¶41

What order/decree?"

¶42

The plaintiff is examined as PW.1 and one witness as PW.2, and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. The defendant No.1 examined as DW.1 and got marked Ex.D.1, the defendant has not chosen any evidence either oral or documentary.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

The trial Court has decreed the suit for the

¶47

reason that the plaintiff is proved to be the owner of the suit property and the defendant is a tenant and the defendant has not produced evidence to show that he has paid the arrears of rent amount; therefore, it decreed the suit for eviction and also directed for payment of arrears of rent and damages.

¶48

Being aggrieved by the same, the defendant preferred the appeal by raising various grounds and learned counsel for the appellant, in consonance with the grounds raised has submitted that the defendant has not become defaulter of the rent amount. It is further submitted that the relationship of owner and tenant between the plaintiff and defendant is in dispute and the plaintiff has not proved the same. Therefore, prays to allow the appeal.

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

On the other hand, learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondent submitted that the plaintiff is the owner of the property and defendant is the tenant, this fact is not disputed. However, he further submitted that the defendant has not produced any evidence that he has paying the rent regularly. Therefore, it is submitted that the defendant become defaulter in payment of rent and considering all these facts, the trial Court has decreed the suit, which does not suffer from any perversity or illegality. Therefore, justified the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Hence, prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶52

Heard the argument from both sides and perused the records made available to this Court at this stage.

¶53

The following point would arise for my consideration:

¶54

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances involved in the case, the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court suffers from any perversity or illegality?

¶57

The suit is filed for ejectment, arrears of rent and damages. The plaintiff is claiming that he is the owner of the shop premises and the defendant is a tenant under plaintiff and the rent agreement is executed for a monthly rent of Rs.24,000/- and an advance amount of Rs.2.00 Lakh.

¶58

The defendant has filed a written statement

¶59

and admitted that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit property. It is the pleadings of the defendant that he has been paying up-to-date rents, but the defendant has not produced any evidence to show that he has paid and has been paying the rent to the plaintiff. Ex.P5 is the rent agreement, which proves that the relationship of the plaintiff and defendant as owner and tenant. Further, the defendant has not produced any evidence, either oral or

¶60

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:33422 RFA No. 1038 of 2022

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

documentary, to prove that he is paying rent to the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff has made a case for a decree of ejectment and arrears of rent and damages.

¶63

The trial court, after appreciating evidence on record in the background of the pleadings made by the parties, has decreed the suit. Therefore, the judgement and decree passed by the trial Court does not suffer from any illegality and perversity. Therefore, the judgment and decree of the trial court is found to be correct. Hence, my answer to the points is in negative . Hence the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

¶64