IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT C.R.P. No.14/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI R.R. KESHAVAMURTHY FOUNDATION REP. BY SRI. N VENKATESH NO.2905, 13TH MAIN ABOVE SBI ATM 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU-560 010.
[BY SRI. R CHANDRANNA, ADV.] AND:
THE BANGALORE GAYANA SAMAJA (REGD.) BY ITS HON. SECRETARY SITUATED AT K.R.ROAD BENGALURU- 560 004.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.10.2018 PASSED IN SC.NO.941/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIII ACMM, BENGALURU [SCCH-5] DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 in S.C.No.941/2017 on the file of the VIII Addl. Small Causes Judge and XXXIII ACMM, Bengaluru.
2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 18 of the Karnataka Small Causes Act, 1964. The petitioner is defendant and respondent is plaintiff in S.C.No.941/2017, which is filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.46,350/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the defendant. The plaintiff states that it is a registered social organization which caters to the cultural activities and strives for development of dance, music and drama. It states that the plaintiff is having auditorium to conduct cultural activities and musical programs. The plaintiff rents the auditorium for conducting and promoting dance and music. The defendant hired the plaintiff’s auditorium for its cultural activities on 14th and 15th June 2014, to celebrate the centenary celebrations of Sri R.R. Keshava murthy. It is stated that defendant’s representative one Sri.N. Venkatesh was one of the member of the Managing Committee of the plaintiff’s Organization, at the time of taking the auditorium on hire. Subsequently the said N. Venkatesh was removed from the Managing Committee. The plaintiff further states that without making payment of Rs.27,500/- for hiring the auditorium on 14 and 15th of June 2014, the defendants conducted the cultural activity and the plaintiff as an exceptional case permitted them to carry out their performance. But the defendant failed to pay the amount of Rs.27,500/- as promised towards rent of the auditorium. Several demands made by the plaintiff also failed. Subsequently the plaintiff states that it had sent reminders on 25.06.2014 and 15.06.2014 demanding the payment. Subsequently legal notice is also issued demanding payment of Rs.46,350/- with interest at 18% p.a.
3. On service of suit summons defendant appeared and filed its written statement admitting the utilization of plaintiffs auditorium on 14th and 15th of June 2014 for centenary celebrations of Sri R.R. Keshavamurthy. The defendant took a specific contention that the committee meeting of the plaintiff was held on 11.02.2014 wherein Sri.N. Venkatesh representative of the defendant had paid Rs.20,000/- by way of cash to the President Sri M.R.V. Prasad and the said payment was made in good faith and trust to the plaintiff’s organization. It is also stated that the defendant had not taken any receipt for the said amount. Based on the pleadings, the trial Court framed the following points for its consideration :-
“1. Whether plaintiff proves that, the defendant is liable to pay Rs.46,350/- with interest at 18% per annum ?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief sought for in the suit ?
3. What order or decree.”
To substantiate the case of the plaintiff it examined PWs.1 and 2, it also marked Exs.P1 to 9, whereas the defendant examined himself as DW.1 and marked the documents Exs.D1 to D7. The Trial Court based on the material on record answered points 1 and 2 in the affirmative and decreed the suit directing defendant to pay principal amount of Rs.27,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Aggrieved by the same, the defendant is in revision before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. There is no dispute with regard to hiring the auditorium of the plaintiff by the defendant for centenary celebration of Late R.R. Krishnamurthy on 14th and 15th of June 2014. But the contention of the defendant is that the representative of defendant Sri.N. Venkatesh, who was member of the plaintiff – Managing Committee at that relevant point had paid Rs.20,000/- by way of cash to the President of the plaintiff’s organization on 11.02.2014. It is also an admitted fact that the defendant had not demanded any receipt from the plaintiff. The plaintiff has placed on record the letter issued by the defendant and also the brochure for having conducted centenary celebration on 14th and 15th of June 2014. It is established by the plaintiff that the defendant had utilized their auditorium on 14th and 15th June 2014 for centenary celebration of Sri R.R. Keshavamurthy. The defendant even though contends that an amount of Rs.20,000/- is paid by cash, to substantiate that contention no material is placed on record. In the absence of any material on record to indicate the payment made by the defendant to the plaintiff towards hiring the auditorium, the trial Court is justified in decreeing the suit.
The defendant’s representative-Sri. N.Venkatesh has stated that he has paid cash of Rs.20,000/- to the President Sri M.R.V. Prasad. But he has not produced any material/document to say that he paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- by way of cash to M.R.V.Prasad. Moreover Sri M.R.V. Prasad was examined as PW2 and in his evidence nothing has come on record to suggest that the defendant has made cash payment. No cogent evidence is placed on record to say that the defendant has made payment to the plaintiff. Thus, the trial Court rightly decreed the suit. I find no erroneousness or perversity in the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.
Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE NG* CT:bms