IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NO.11613 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
Sri.Chandrahasa S/o late Siddaiah Aged about 56 years R/at No.1082, 4th Main Vijayanagar Mysuru – 571123.
(By Sri.Sangamesh R.S., Advocate) AND:
Bandipur Tiger Reserve Forest Represented by Conservator of Forest and Director Bandipur Tiger Reserve Bandipur – 571123.
...PETITIONER …RESPONDENT (By Sri.A.S.Ponnanna, Additional Advocate General along with Sri.D.R.Anandeeswar, HCGP) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 4.10.2017 passed in O.S.No.181/2017 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC., Gundlupet on I.A.No.2 filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 [Annexure-A] and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The plaintiff filed the present Writ Petition against the concurrent finding on facts recorded by the Courts below rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff for temporary injunction.
2. The plaintiff filed suit for permanent injunction to direct the defendant not to dispossess the plaintiff illegally without due process of law. Along with the plaint, plaintiff also filed an application for temporary injunction. The trial Court considering the application and objections by an order dated 4th October 2017 rejected the application which was the subject matter of the Misc. Appeal in M.A.No.25/2017 before the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., Gundlupet. The learned Senior Civil Judge by the impugned order dated 02.03.2018 dismissed the appeal. Hence the present Writ Petition is filed.
3. Sri.Sangamesh, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the undertaking affidavit before this Court stating that he had already deposited Rs.6,10,000/- before the trial Court towards upto date rents i.e., upto March 2019 payable to the defendant and the same may be withdrawn by the defendant. He would further contended that a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- is due by the defendant payable to the plaintiff including security deposit. Rs.2,10,000/- is the outstanding due amount for supply of certain food materials to the respondent. Therefore, he submits that eight months’ time may be granted to vacate and hand over the vacant possession and he submits that total amount of Rs.3,10,000/- may be adjusted towards future rents at the rate of Rs.40,500/- per month.
4. Per contra, Sri. Ponnanna, learned Additional Advocate General sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Courts below and contended that the lease agreement of the petitioner is already expired on 31.03.2019. In view of serious allegations made, two months time may be granted to the petitioner to vacate and hand over the vacant possession to the respondent.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below and in view of the undertaking filed before this Court and in the interest of justice, it is suffice to grant six months’ time to the petitioner to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the canteen premises to the defendant without fail and respondent is at liberty to deduct/adjust Rs.40,500/- per month out of Rs.3,10,000/- payable to the petitioner towards future rents for a period of six months. Remaining amount, if any, (approximately Rs.67,000/-) shall be refunded to the plaintiff by the defendant without driving the plaintiff for further proceedings. The plaintiff shall not seek any further extension of time and he should hand over vacant possession of the canteen premises on or before 24.10.2019 without fail, failing which, the defendant is at liberty to take appropriate action after paying the balance amount to the plaintiff in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE Prs*