IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.82 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Sri. Nagesh D.V. S/o Sri. Venkatesh, Aged about 47 years, R/o H.No.1868, Ground Floor, 7th ‘A’ Main, E-Block, 2nd Stage, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010.
(By Sri. K.B. Lokanath, Advocate) AND:
Sri. T. Bharat S/o late Sri. B.M. Thangavelu, Aged about 47 years, R/at No. 1868, 7th ‘A’ Main, E-Block, 2nd Stage, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010.
(By Sri. Nataraj D., Advocate for Sri. S.N. Channabasappa, Advocate) … Petitioner … Respondent This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 18 of the Small Causes Courts Act, against the judgment and decree dated 10.11.2017 passed in SC No.956/2017 on the file of the VIII Additional Small Causes Judge and XXXIII ACMM Member-MACT, Bengaluru decreeing suit for ejectment.
This Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.K.B.Lokanath, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Nataraj.D, learned counsel for Sri.Channabasappa, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of both the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition filed under Section 18 of the Small Causes Courts Act, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the judgment dated 10.11.2017 by which a decree for eviction has been passed against the petitioner.
4. The facts giving rise to filing of this petition briefly stated are that the petitioner is a tenant of respondent in respect of premises on monthly rent of Rs.10,500/- in the ground floor.
5. The petitioner had entered into an agreement with respondent on 01.10.2016. The respondent in the month of January, 2017 instructed the petitioner to vacate the premises in question. Thereafter, the petition for eviction was filed before the Small Causes Court. The petitioner despite service of summons on him did not appear. Thereupon the trial Court recorded the evidence of the respondent and for the reasons assigned in paragraph No.9 of the judgment, recorded the finding that the relationship of the landlord and tenant is proved between the parties and accordingly, the suit filed by the respondent was decreed. In the aforesaid factual background, this revision petition has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he be granted two weeks time to vacate the premises in question.
7. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner is in arrears of rent and for recovery of which the proceedings has already been initiated and he be permitted to initiate the execution proceedings for recovery of arrears of rent.
8. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner herein to vacate the premises in question within a period of two weeks from today.
9. Needless to state that respondent shall be at liberty to initiate execution proceedings for recovery of amount of arrears of rent against the petitioner.
In case, the possession is not handed over by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today, the respondent shall be at liberty to seek eviction of the petitioner through the execution proceedings.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.Nos.3/2018 and 4/2018 do not survive for consideration. Hence, disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-