Karnataka High Court
Mr Mohammed Sami vs Mr Mudasir Pasha on 9 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
CRP No. 699 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 699 OF 2023 (SC)
BETWEEN:
MR. MOHAMMED SAMI,
S/O. MR. MOHAMMED MOULA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
BEARING NO.22, 2ND FLOOR,
"A" PORTION C STREET,
BYDERAHALLI,
BENSON TOWN POST,
BENGALURU - 560 046.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED THOUHEED, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND:
1. MR. MUDASIR PASHA,
Digitally S/O. LATE SULAIMAN K. M.,
signed by H AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
K HEMA
Location: 2. MRS. NIDA TARANUM,
High Court
of Karnataka W/O. MR. MUDASIR PASHA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
BOTH RESIDING AT,
NO.26/7, M. N 4TH STREET,
S. H. ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 051.
BOTH REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER,
MR. MUZAMIL PASHA,
S/O. LATE K.M. SULAIMAN,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
CRP No. 699 of 2023
R/AT NO.26/7, M.NO.4TH STREET,
S.H.ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 051.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MASKOOR HASHMI M.D., ADVOCATE)
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.18 OF SMALL CAUSES
COURT ACT., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
24.05.2023 PASSED IN SC NO.483/2022 ON THE FILE OF XI
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES AND ADDL.MACT,
BENGALURU(SCCH-12), DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
EJECTMENT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Aggrieved by the judgment passed in
S.C.No.483/2022 dated 24.05.2023, passed by the XI
Additional Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bengaluru
(SCCH-12), the defendant therein has preferred this Civil
Revision Petition.
2. For sake of convenience, the parties are referred to
as per their status before the Trial Court.
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
3. Plaintiffs are the owners of the property and
defendant was the tenant.
4. On the ground that the term of tenancy had expired
and also on the ground that the defendant was not paying
the rents regularly, plaintiffs filed S.C.No.483/2022.
5. The defendant in his written statement, admitted the
jural relationship of landlord and tenant between the
plaintiffs and defendant. He also admitted that he
committed default in payment of rents and that the term
was over. However, he disputed as to the amount of rents
payable by him.
6. Based on the pleadings, the Trial Court framed the
following points and has answered the same as follows;
"1. Whether the Plaintiff proves the jural
relationship between the Plaintiff and
defendant in respect of suit schedule
premises as stated in the plaint?
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
2. Whether the plaintiff has complied the
provisions contemplated under section
109 of TP Act?
3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for quit
and delivery of vacant possession of suit
schedule property along with other reliefs
as prayed for?
4. What order?
Point No.1: In the Affirmative.
Point No.2: In the Affirmative.
Point No.3: In the Affirmative
Point No.4: As per final order"
7. The Trial Court has passed the following order;
" The suit of the plaintiff is hereby
decreed with cost.
The defendant is hereby directed to quit
and deliver the vacant possession of the
suit schedule premises in favour of the
Plaintiff within one month from the date
of order.
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
The plaintiff is entitled to recover and
defendant is liable to pay a sum of
Rs.42,000/- with interest at the rate of
6% p.a from the date of suit till its
realization.
As there is no evidence regarding
mesne profit he is not entitled for the
same.
And it is further order and decreed that,
defendant do pay to the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.12,971/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand
Nine Hundred and Seventy One only)
towards arrears of rent."
8. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision
Petition is filed.
9. The petitioner in the petition contends that notice
has not been issued to him properly and further contends
that if two years of time is granted, he would vacate the
property. But, however, in the petition, it is not explained
as to how notice has been not properly issued. The Trial
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
Court in its findings based on the evidence let in has come
to the conclusion that the notice as contemplated under
the Transfer of the Property Act has been issued properly.
Further, on the evidence let in, the Trial Court has
concluded that there is a jural relationship of landlord and
tenant between the plaintiffs and the defendant and that
defendant has committed default in payment of rents and
that the term of tenancy is also over. For the said reasons,
the Trial Court has allowed the suit filed by the plaintiffs.
10. The defendant apart from making general
statements that the order of the Trial Court is erroneous
has not been able to point out as to how the same is
erroneous. Further, learned counsel for the
defendant/petitioner is absent today at the time of hearing
of the matter.
11. Further it is submitted that the delivery warrant has
already been executed and the plaintiffs are in possession
of the property concerned.
NC: 2024:KHC:1011
12. For the aforementioned reasons and for the reason
that the defendant has failed to point out any error on
part of the Trial Court in passing the impugned order, the
Civil Revision Petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CH
