Appeal filed against eviction decree granted in landlord-tenant dispute. High Court dismissed appeal after finding that jural relationship was admitted by appellants and evidence was unchallenged, holding no sufficient grounds to interfere.
Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
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.
[3258 ]
IN THE HIGH COURTFORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THESECONDDAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRIJUSTICESAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
ctw CIVIL COURTAPPEAL NO: 30 oF 2023
AppealUnderSectiong6ofC'P.CaggrievedbytheJudgmentandDecree dated,17.o2.2O23passed in o.S.No.772of 2O18 on the file of the court of the XXV Additional ChiefJudge' City Civil Court at Hyderabad'
Between:
M/s. Sri Mouli Tiffins,Rep. by its Partners.
(Both are runnino at Shop No.1 , Ground Floor, RevathiApartmentsGayatri fiagir, BeninOMaithrivanam, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500 038'
...APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS
AND
Smt.LalitaDeviHisariya,,W/o.LatePrahaladPrasadHisariyaAged64years, o"lj, H"Ji"n6ropot lrio.i s, sanjeevaiahNagar _cotony,Tadbund, Rep. byler GpA noUer Sri SunilKumar Jaiodia S/o.Late B.P.Jajodia,q.SS 5u Yga.rs'ircc: Pvt. Employee Fyo.FlatNo.306, Shasank Residency, Bapuji-NagarMarnKoao i'r!rr. Wit#gitRiceDepot, Bowenpally, Secunderabad - 500 011'
...RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF
IA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under section151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstated intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCoUrtmaybepleasedto Suspend the Judgmentand DecreedatedlT 'O2'2O23 passedin O'S No 772 of 20lsonthefileofHon,bleXXVAdditionalChiefJudge,CityCivilCourtat Hyderabad,pending disposal of the first appeal'
7
lA NO: 2 oF2023
Petition underSection 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavitfiled in supportof tn" p"titi*,tnt Hign Court may be pleased ^to extend the timefor deposit;gin" "rno'nt for furthei twomonths dt 25-04-2023 ," i An;. i itzozz in i.c.c.A.ruo.30 ot 2023,in the interestof justice'
Counsel forAppellant:SRI T' RAJINIKANTHREDDY
Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI ARVIND KUMARAGARWAL
The Courtmade the following:JUDGMENT
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICESAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
c.c.c.A.No 30 of 2023
JUDG MENT:
This Civil Appeal has been filed by the defendantsin OS.No. 772 of 2018 on the file of XXV Addl. ChiefJudge, City Civil Court under Section 96 of C.P.C. assailingthe ludgment and Decreeof the trial Court dated L7-02-2023,where under the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for eviction of the defendantsfrom the suit schedule shop, forpayment of the arrears of rent andfor mesne profits was decreed.
respondent/plaintiff filed the above stated original suitseeking the eviction of the appellants/defendants, recovery of arrears ofrent etc., The appellants/defendants have beingresisted the suit claim. The Court below having appreciated thepleadings, oral and documentary evidence, accepted the claim of respondent/plaintiff and passed a decree directing the appellants to vacatethe schedule shop and also topay arrears of rent. However, thetrial Court gave liberty to the respondent/plaintiff for filing a separate petition for recovery of mesne profits. As could be seen from the decree, the lower Court directed the appellants herein topay the arrears of rent of Rs.12,03,660/- with interest @ L2o/oper annum'
2
S5RN,] C C.C.A.N) 30 of 2023
Being aggrieved by the saidjudgment, the appellants herein have filed this appeal r:rr the following grounds.
55RN,J C.C.C.A.No.30 of 2023
3
into the averments made bythe parties in theirrespective pleadings and evidenceplaced before the trial Court.
4
SSRN,] C.C C.A.tlo.30 of 2023
a written staternent. According to his statement, they did not dispute their obl.aining the pi-emises on lease and executior of the rental deed. They did not dispute the quantum of rent but. denied the other averments and sought for dismissal of the suit. The trial Court framed the following four issues:
B. In view oF the grounds on which the present appeal is filed, the following points arose for consideration :
SSRN,J C.C.C.A.No.30 of 2023
s
1
Whether thereis a validnotice under Section105of T.P.Act ?
3 Whether the respondent/plaintiffis able to prove the jural relationship between the appellantandrespondents?
P INTS :
6
SSRN,I C C.C.A No 30 ot 2023
that the appellants inpara No.5 of the written statement have categorically admitted that they are running a Tiffin center in the suit schedule property on monthly rent of Rs.1,70,000/- p us GST, which comes to Rs.2,00,000/- per month and entered into an agreement with the respondent on 01-11-2017. The appellants have claimed that they have paid Rs.10,00,000/- as advance to the respondent and the said aspect was suppressed by the respondent/plaintiff. Therefore, in view of the admitted fact that the appellants are tenants of the respondent and agreed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- per month. The jural relationship has been proved and there is nc, necessity for the respondent to again adcluce any evidence.
,// /,.
SSRN,I C.C.C.A.No.30 ol2023
7
appellants that theyhavechallengedthe order in IA'No.B16 of 2019, thereby, the order hasbecomefinal and binding on the appellants. The trialCourtwhile analyzingthe evidence andin view of the above statedcircumstances categorically gavea finding in Para Nos.11,12 of the Judgment and passed a decreein favour of the respondent.Absolutely,there are no groundsto set aside thejudgment or tointerferewith the said finding. Therefore,
the appeal is liable tobe dismissed.
t2. In the result, the appealis dismissed.
Consequently,Miscellaneousapplicationsif any, are closed. No costs.
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/-B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR aI v SECTION OFFICER
\
To,
pr
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0210812023
JUDGMENT+DECREE
CCCA.No.30 ot 2023
1tr E s;f4 f
R
o
) c:
7.
0E 0t,Im
-4-
<br>
DISMISSING THE CCCA
DD'
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGAN AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL NO: 30 OF 2023
Between:
M/s. Sri Mouli Tiffins, Rep. byits Partners.
(Both are running at Shop No.1 , Ground Floor, Rgyat!1 ApartmentsGayatri Nagar, Behind Maithrivanam, Ameerpet, Hyderabad- 500 038.
...APPELLANTS/DEFEDANTS
AND
Smt. Lalita Devi Hisariya,, W/o. Late PrahaladPrasad HisariyaAged 64 years, Occ: Household Plot No.15, SanjeevaiahNagar Colony,Tadbund, Rep. by her GPA Holder Sri Sunil Kumar Jajodia S/o.LateB.P.Jajodia,aged50 years, Occ: Pvt. Employee R/o.FIat No.306, Shasank Residency,Bapuji Nagar Main Road Near Warangal Rice Depot, Bowenpally, Secunderabad- 500 011.
...RESPONDENTS/PLAINTI FF
Appeal Under Section 96 of C.P.C aggrieved by theJudgment and Decree dated 17.o2.2023passed in O.S.No.772 of 2018on the file of the Court of the XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.
ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing andupon perusingthe grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of theLower Courtand the material papersin the case and upon hearing the arguments of SRl. TRAJINIKANTHREDDY' Advocate for the Appellants and of SRI ARVIND KUMARAGARWAL, Advocatefor the Respondent
This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:
Sd/-B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
EI SECTION dFFICER
To,
pr
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0210812023
DECREE
CCCA.No.30 ot 2023
DISMISSING THE CCCA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in recording findings regarding the validity of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and the jural relationship between parties.
Whether appellants have any grounds to set aside the decree for recovery of arrears of rent passed by the trial court.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Sri Mouli Tiffins
Sagave Govinda Rao
Shivaji
Smt. Lalita Devi Hisariya
Sambasiva Rao Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
