IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 14592 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI. J. R. AJAY KUMAR S/O J E RAMASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, R/O LAKKAVANAHALLI ROAD, HIRIYUR TOWN NOW R/A CHALUKYA LOGDE AND RESTAURANT B M RAOD, MADDUR.
(BY SRI. RAJESWARA P N, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT. BHAGYALATHA W/O M C NAGESH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 2. M C NAGESH S/O M C CHNNAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS AGRICULTURISTS & BUSINESSMAN 3. M N KAILASH S/O M C NAGESH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 4. M N YASHAS S/O M C NAGESH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT CHANNE GOWDANA, DODDI B M ROAD, MADDUR - 564728.
…PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S R HEGDE HUDLAMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4(NOC)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2018 ON I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.1/2017 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE COURT OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA (ANNEXURE-A); AND ETC., THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the plaintiff in a mandatory injunction suit in O.S.No.1/2017 is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 13.03.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A, whereby the learned I Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Mandya having allowed respondent-defendants application filed u/s.151 of CPC, 1908 has directed him to pay the arrears of rent quantified at Rs.61,10,500/- (Rupees sixty one lakh ten thousand and five hundred) only with a default clause of eviction.
2. After service of notice, the respondents having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the writ petition by filing the Statement of Objections.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court grants a limited reprieve to the petitioner as under, because:
(a) admittedly petitioner is the tenant who has been in the occupation & use of the subject property pursuant to a registered rental agreement dated 11.08.2011, a copy whereof is at Annexure-B and that his suit itself is founded on this document which prescribes a monthly rent of Rs.1,10,000/- which again is admittedly paid for a certain period; however, the petitioner at para 5 (d) of his plaint has contended “it is agreed and settled that the monthly rent payable by the plaintiff is Rs.82,000/- and not Rs.1,10,000/-“ therefore he is required to pay the arrears of rent for the subject period at this agreed rate, to say the least.
(b) the argument of the petitioner that the respondent landlord has to construct some more rooms under the rental agreement and further has to obtain the CL-7 License for running the bar and therefore no rent need be paid at all till after the same is accomplished, if accepted, virtually amounts to permitting him to enjoy the property sans any rent/fee, and therefore amounts to make the respondent suffer the detriment without any consideration; the Writ Court cannot approve such an unconscionable stand;
(c) the contention of the petitioner that in the absence of statutory enablement like the Maharashtra Amendment to the CPC, the Courts in Karnataka cannot grant impugned orders of the kind u/s.151 of CPC, 1908 is too farfetched a submission; true it is, in a bit different context a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.44943/2016 (GM-CPC) vide judgment dated 20.10.2016 had granted some relief to the litigating tenant therein; the said decision was rendered fact specific and does not lay down a universal law that the payment of rent cannot be ordered u/s.151 in any circumstance; and, (d) whether because of non-compliance of certain conditions in the rental agreement by the respondent- defendants, the petitioner-tenant is liable to pay entire arrears of rent at the rate mentioned in the agreement itself, is a larger question to be debated before the court below after trial, inasmuch as petitioner claims to have suffered loss because of breach of conditions of the agreement attributable to the respondents; however, justice of the case requires that the petitioner should deposit in the court below the arrears of rent for the subject period at the rate of Rs.82,000/- per month as averred by him at para 5(d) of the plaint; this amount will be held in trust by the court below for the party emerging victorious in the suit.
In the above circumstances this writ petition succeeds in part; the impugned order is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall deposit the arrears of rent for the subject period and shall go on depositing the rents accruing due hereafter in the court below at the rate of Rs.82,000/- per month; the court below shall put the said amount in a short term deposit in any Nationalised Bank; to whom this amount or any other amount should go, shall depend upon the outcome of the suit proceeding.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE Snb/