IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.42230 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN SRI.H.V. DEVARAJU NAIDU, S/O LATE H.K. VENKATASWAMY NAIDU, AGED 62 YEARS, MUDALIYAR STREET, ARASIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 103. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.K.G. SADASHIVAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND SRI.A.V. RAMESH BABU, S/O A. RAGHAVALU NAIDU, AGED 62 YEARS, NO.4599, SUBHASH NAGAR, ARASIKERE TOWN, ARASIKERE, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 103. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B.N. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE ON I.A. AS PER ANNEXURE-F IN O.S.NO.312/2016 DATED 07.08.2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the defendant in a money suit in O.S.No.312/2016, is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court for assailing the order dated 7.8.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure – A whereby the learned II Addl. Civil Judge, Arasikere, has directed him to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month “towards rent and interest of the shop to the plaintiff”. After service of notice, the respondent-plaintiff having entered caveat through his counsel, resists the Writ Petition.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, although the reasoning part of the impugned order cannot be much faltered in view of petitioner’s admission at para 11 of his Written Statement dated 18.11.2015, a copy whereof is at Annexure – C, the amount payable needs to be reduced to 50% i.e., Rs.20,000/- in view of the contents of the very said paragraph itself which reads as under:
“Ii. ªÁ¢AiÀÄÄ ªÉÄÃ¯É ºÉýzÀAvÉ. ¸ÀzÀj ZÁ®ÄPÀå ¨Ágï CAqï gɸÉÆÖÃgÉAl£ÀÄß ¸ÀjAiÀiÁV £ÀqɸÀzÉ, F ¥ÀÀæwªÁ¢üAiÉÄà ªÀ»¹PÉÆAqÀÄ £ÀqɸÀÄvÁÛ §AzÁUÉå ªÁ¢UÉ ¸ÀzÀj ¨Áj£À°è §gÀĪÀ DzÁAiÀÄ ªÀivÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀj ©°ØAUï£À ¨ÁrUÉ gÀÆ¥ÀzÀ°è wAUÀ½UÉ £À®ªÀvÀÄÛ ¸Á«gÀ gÀÆ¥Á¬ÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß FUÀ®Æ ¸ÀºÀ dªÀiÁ ªÀiÁqÀÄvÁÛ EgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.”
3. The above paragraph shows that the sum of rs.40,000/- is arrived at by taking into account both the rent and the income from the wine business; the business is stated to be materially affected by the alleged conduct of respondent which is a matter for trial and adjudicated in the suit; this rent component is tentatively taken at Rs.20,000/- for the limited purpose of adjudication of this writ petition.
In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds in part; the impugned order is modified by reducing the monthly payable amount from Rs.40,000/- to Rs.20,000/- with effect from November 2015 subject to outcome of the suit.
All contentions of the parties are kept open. No costs.
cbc Sd/- JUDGE