Cross appeals between landlord and tenant over a terminated residential lease. The High Court held the tenant, who repeatedly sought to hand back possession, liable only for rent for the 11-month lease period already paid in advance, plus maintenance charges, and ordered refund of the balance deposited amount.
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: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2019 (MON)
C/W
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1968 OF 2012 (MON)
IN RFA No. 23/2019
BETWEEN:
MR. BALAJI SHANMUGANATH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O MR.J.SHANMUGANATH, R/AT NO.9, NORRIS ROAD, CANTERBURY APARTMENTS, FLAT NO.G-2, RICHMOND TOWN, BANGALORE-560 025.
Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. RAJESH D M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
…APPELLANT
MR MOHAMMED ALI ASIF MEHKRI S/O MR.AHMED ALI MEHKRI R/AT NO.61/21, CHICK BAZAAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 051.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SHWETHA SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.09.2018 PASSED IN OS.NO.7122/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.
IN RFA NO. 1968/2012
BETWEEN:
BALAJI SHANMUGANATH S/O MR J SHANMUGANATH AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.9, NORRIS ROAD CENTERBURY APARTMENTS FLAT NO.G-2, RICHMOND TOWN BANGALORE-560 025.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJESH D M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR MOHAMMED ALI ASIF MEHKRI S/O MR AHMED ALI MEHKRI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS NO.61/21, CHICK BAZAAR ROAD TASKER TOWN SHIVAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560 051.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SHWETHA SHANMUKHAPPA.,ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.08.2012 PASSED IN O.S.NO.3022/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI-ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Appellant herein was a tenant under respondent in respect of a residential flat bearing No.G3 also known as Unit No.003 situated in the ground floor of the building 'Arambha' situated at No.23/3 Alfred Street, Richmond Town, Bangalore25 measuring 1875 square feet and other common area with parking space having been inducted in terms of an agreement of lease dated 26.09.2008. Admittedly the term of the lease was for a period of 11 months. The monthly rent agreed to be paid by the petitioner was Rs.34,000/-. A sum of Rs.2,04,000/was paid towards interest free refund of security deposit. In addition petitioner was also required to pay electricity consumption charges and the maintenance charges towards the flat.
of the possession of the flat, it was found that there were certain defects in the property in the nature of replacement of sanitary, plumbing, electrical items which the appellant had
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
identified and brought to the notice of the respondent. That respondent had promised and assured to carry out the defects identified by the appellant.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
premises for a period of 8 months being liable to pay the rent upto 31.05.2009 amounted to Rs.2,72,000/-. Remaining balance payable from and out of the advance rent was only Rs.1,02,000/-. Said amount together with the refundable cheque deposit of Rs.2,04,000/- was payable only when the tenant vacated and delivered the vacant possession of property. Till then respondent was not entitled for the relief as sought for. Hence sought for dismissal of suit.
it is contended that though the respondent had expressed his intention to receive the keys, appellant did not deliver the same and it is only by virtue of the order of the High Court he delivered the keys on 29.11.2011. As such he was liable to pay the rents from October 2008 upto 29.11.2011. That is for a period of 38 months amounting to Rs.12,92,000/-. That despite the request made by the respondent in said suit in O.S.No.3022/2009 he did not give the keys. That the trial Court by its judgment and decree dated 04.08.2012 dismissed the suit in O.S.No.3022/2009 with costs. Thus the appellant has admitted the fact of he holding the keys of the flat from the
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
date of his occupation till 29.11.2011 being liable to pay the amount as claimed. In addition to the amount of Rs.12,92,000/- payable towards the rent, it is further contended that the appellant was liable to pay maintenance charges to the Association and the electricity consumption charges to BESCOM which aggregated in a sum of Rs.1,26,554/-. Thus in aggregate appellant was due and liable to pay Rs.14,18,554/- after deducting the advance amount of Rs.3,74,000/- appellant was still due and liable to pay Rs.10,44,554/-. Hence both the appellant and respondent filed the above suits in O.S.No.3022/2009 and O.S.No.7122/2012 for recovery of sum of Rs.2,04,000/- and Rs.10,44,554/respectively with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation.
HC-KAR
the disputes are resolved which memo was rejected by the trial Court vide order dated 24.04.2010. Appellant was thus ready to deliver the keys of the premises right from 01.04.2009, respondent was not in a position to pay the admitted amount as per the written statement filed by the appellant. If the respondent had deposited the admitted amount, he could have taken the keys having failed to do so, it was not open for respondent to claim the amount. There was inherent vastu defect in the premises. The respondent had played fraud on the appellant by not disclosing the said defect as well as not carrying out the repair as promised.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
Rs.10,44,554/- was not maintainable. Hence sought for
dismissal of the suit.
O.S.No.3022/2009:
"1. Whether the plaintiff proves that defendant has agreed to complete the pending works as stated in plaint para 3(a) to (g)?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the interest 18% p.a. as prayed?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for?"
Following issues in O.S.No.7122/2012:
"1. Whether the plaintiff proves that defendant is due of Rs.10,44,554/- to him towards rent from 10.10.2008 to 29.11.2011 and maintenance charges?
2. Whether the cause of action arose to file the suit?
3. Whether plaintiff is entitled for the decree as prayed for?
4. What order or decree?"
29.09.2018 passed in O.S.No.7122/2012, trial Court partly decreed the suit filed by the respondent directing the appellant herein to pay Rs.10,24,856/- along with interest @ 6% p.a.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
being rent towards 38 months from 10.10.2008 to 29.11.2011 and maintenance charges of Rs.1,06,856/-. Being aggrieved by the same appellant is in appeal in RFA No.23/2019.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
that the respondent had declined to take possession of the premises insisting that appellant was not entitled to terminate the lease and would be liable to pay the rental for the entire term of 11 months. Though appellant had admittedly occupied the premises only for a period of five months, he submitted this unreasonable demand in the absence of any provisions in the lease agreement, had constrained the appellant to file the suit. That in the meanwhile appellant to the knowledge of the respondent had vacated the premises and was staying separately. The bonafide attempt of the appellant to return the keys is also evidenced by the fact that apart from offering the possession through the notice, he had also filed a memo before the trial Court which was rejected and the appellant pursued the matter by filing writ petition No.23104/2010. It is only thereafter appellant had an opportunity to hand over the key. Therefore, he submits that no blameworthy trait can be attributed to the appellant. That the respondent cannot derive benefit of his own wrong which both the trial Courts have failed to appreciate warranting interference at the hands of this Court.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
"(i) Whether appellant herein is entitled for recovery of Rs.2,44,000/- towards interest free security deposit as well as another Rs.2,04,000/- being balance amount from and out of advance rentals after deducting rents for a period of five months?
(ii) Whether the respondent (plaintiff in O.S.No.7122/2012) is entitled for recovery of Rs.10,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum with Rs.1,00,000/- towards security and maintenance charges?"
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
Exhibit P3
”xxx
1. I and my father approached you through the broker Sri.Khuram Abid, and on coming to know that you are intending to let out the Residential Apartment bearing No.G3 also known as Unit No.003 in the Ground Floor of the Building "ARAMBHA" situated at No.23/3, Alfred Street, Richmond Town, Bangalore-560 025, talks I and my father are held in that connection.
2 You represented
3. You also showed us the apartment and apprised us about the pending works to be completed. You also represented that you would be interested in letting out the said Apartment on monthly rent of Rs.34,000/-Rupees Thirty Four Thousand Only). You further stated that you would be requiring the entire 11 months rent in advance in
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
order to enable you to complete the balance works pending in the apartment.
4. Based on the above representation and the assurance given by you I agreed to take the above Apartment on rent subject to your completing the, balance works in the apartment. You readily agreed to do so subject to, payment of rent for a period of 11 months in advance in a sum of Rs.3,74,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Only) and also another sum of Rs.2,04,000/(Rupees Two Lakhs Four Thousand Only) towards the security deposit.
5. Accordingly, a Lease Deed dated 06-09-2008 was entered into between you and me and collected in all a sum of Rs.5,74,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Only) as under:
(i) Rs.3,74,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Only) vide Cheque bearing No.584697 dated 5-10-2008 and
(ii) Rs. 2,04,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Four Thousand Only) vide Cheque bearing No.584696 dated 26-9-2008.
6. I and my father took your words and paid the amount in good faith in the hope and belief that you would honor your commitment.
7. You delivered possession of the above premises on 01-11-2008 and assured that you will rectify the defects, drawbacks and replace the sanitary, plumbing and electrical items in the premises which I and my father identified and brought to your notice.
8. There are several defects in the Leased Premises which have not been rectified in spite of repeated requests and demands. Some of the defects which have been identified and brought to your notice are stated hereunder
8. It is strange that after collecting the advance rent in a sum of Rs.3,74,000/-(Rupees Three lakh Seventy Four Thousand Only) and also Security Deposit of Rs.2,04,000/(Rupees Two Lakhs Four Thousand Only), you have not honored your commitment to complete and rectify the defects, drawbacks and replace the sanitary, plumbing and electrical items in the premises as promised, in spite of repeated requests. You have not bothered to do the pending works and failed to keep up your promise to make the house a habitable one. Therefore, I have no intention
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
to continue to live in premises and accordingly, I hereby terminate the lease by giving time till 31.03.2009. You may refund the security deposit of Rs.2,04,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Four Thousand Only) and the advance rent paid in a sum of Rs.3,74,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Only after adjusting the rent for 5 months and viz., Ist November 2008 to 31st March 2009.
9. Please take notice that.,
(i) you are hereby called upon to refund the entire security deposit of Rs.2,04,000/(Rupees Two Lakhs Four Thousand Only) and a sum of Rs. 2,04,000/- from out of Rs. 3, 74,000/- as advance rent on or before 31-03-2009, failing which, I have no option except to proceed in, accordance with law holding you liable for all costs and consequences. This is without prejudice to my rights to claim damages and also to claim refund of the excessive rents from November 2008 till 30-03-2009.
(ii) I would be delivering vacant possession of the premises on 31-03 2009 or even earlier provided you refund the aforesaid amount. If you fail to refund the amount as demanded, I am under no obligation to pay the rent from 01-04-2009 onwards until you hand over the refund.
(iii) You would be liable to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the said sum of Rs.4,08,000/- from 31-03-2009 till the date of payment".
Reply notice -Ex.P5:
"I am in receipt of your letter dated 28.02.2009 in respect of the subject matter. In this connection I wish to reply as under:-
1. Before entering into the agreement you inspected the apartment and only after ensuring that it was suitable to your requirements did you enter into agreement with me.
2. Secondly, your father, a central government employee was required to enter into the agreement with me but for various reasons, best known to him and you, you chose to be the Lessee.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
3. I understand from the association looking after the maintenance of the building that they have visited the apartment several times to rectify whatever problems that have been informed to them and that all the electrical and sanitary fittings are working well. In the past one month, you have deliberately not allowed me nor the association staff to address the pending issues you have at the apartment for reasons best known to you.
4. On my part, I have tried my level best to provide you with whatever was required as per the agreement entered into between us.
5. I have also learnt that you have not paid brokerage to your broker Mr. Khuram Abid of Abids Estate Agency, which does not speak very high about your business ethics.
6. I have reliably learnt that you have obtained admission into a college in Chennai and required to move there to pursue your further education and to achieve this end you are trying to find reasons for vacating the apartment and terminating the tenancy.
7. The lease deed entered into between us does not permit the Lessee to terminate the same before the expiry of 11 months. In view of this I am unable to accept early termination of the Lease Deed.
8. However, since you have decided to vacate the apartment, I will retain 11 months rent paid in advance in full as initially agreed between us very clearly and refund only your deposit amount of Rs.2,04,000/ after deducting unpaid maintenance charges to association, electricity bills and damages if any.
9. In view of what I have stated above, I will be present on 31.03.2009 to take over possession of my apartment and refund the sum which is due as explained above".
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
contention of the respondent as noted above at paragraphs 7 and 8 of the reply.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
HC-KAR
clause in the lease agreement the respondent cannot insist for payment of rents for the period which is not occupied by the appellant.
NC: 2026:KHC:9412 RFA No. 23 of 2019 C/W RFA No. 1968 of 2012
HC-KAR
charges at the rate of Rs.2,812/- for a period of 11 months (Rs.2,812x11= Rs.30,932/-) shall be paid to the respondent. Balance sum of Rs.1,69,068/- shall be refunded to the appellant.
Accordingly, appeals stand disposed of.
Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE
RU/SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the tenant was entitled to refund of security deposit and balance advance rent after deducting rent for the five months actually occupied?
Whether the landlord could claim rent beyond the 11-month lease term when he refused to accept possession unless paid for the full term?
Whether the trial court's decree of rent for 38 months was sustainable in the absence of an express bar on termination in the lease?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Balaji Shanmuganath
Mohammed Ali Asif Mehkri
M.G.S. KAMAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
