Skip to content


Syed Farooq Vs. Rudranamma - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberHouse Rent Revision Petition No. 82 of 2016
Judge
AppellantSyed Farooq
RespondentRudranamma
Excerpt:
.....by trial court, allowing petition filed under sections 27(2)(d)(ii), 27(2)(r) and 31(1)(c) of 1999 act and also directing petitioner/tenant to quit, vacate and deliver vacant possession of petition schedule premises to respondent/landlord immediately from date of order in view of invoking provisions of section 31(1)(c) of act - court held - in view of joint memo filed by parties, and affidavit of undertaking filed by petitioner, civil revision petition was disposed of by modifying order passed in case on file of trial court, in terms of joint memo - it was needless to observe that in case of any violation of terms of joint memo, it was always open to respondent/landlord to approach this court - petition disposed of. paras : (5) comparative citation: 2017 (1) kantlj 267, .....to the respondent. 4. today, the petitioner-tenant has paid a sum of rs. 18,000/- (rupees eighteen thousand only) by way of cash to sri b.c. renukaradhya - general power of attorney holder of the respondent in the open court towards arrears of rent. power of attorney holder of the respondent acknowledges the receipt of rs. 18,000/- from the petitioner. 5. in view of the joint memo filed by the parties, and the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner, the civil revision petition is disposed of by modifying the impugned order dated 1st september, 2016 passed in hrc no. 16 of 2016 on the file of the chief judge, court of small causes, bangalore, in terms of the joint memo. it is needless to observe that in case of any violation of terms of the joint memo, it is always open to the.....
Judgment:

B. Veerappa, J.

1. This is a tenant's revision petition filed against the order dated 1st September, 2016 passed in HRC No. 16 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, allowing the petition filed under Sections 27(2)(d)(ii), 27(2)(r) and 31(1)(c) of the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 and also directing the petitioner-tenant to quit, vacate and deliver vacant possession of the petition schedule premises to the respondent-landlord immediately from the date of the order in view of invoking the provisions of Section 31(1)(c) of the Karnataka Rent Act.

2. Learned Counsel for the parties have filed a joint memo dated 4-10-2016 signed by the petitioner and General Power of Attorney holder of the respondent and the learned Counsel for the parties to the lis. Parties have filed the joint memo voluntarily without any force. The joint memo is placed on record. As per the joint memo, the petitioner-tenant has agreed to vacate the schedule premises on or before 31st March, 2017 and the same is agreed by the respondent-landlord. It is also agreed by the respondent-landlord that during the period of stay of the petitioner-tenant in the schedule premises, he will not disturb his possession. Respondent-landlord also agreed to withdraw Execution Petition No. 1825 of 2016 in view of the joint memo.

3. The petitioner had also filed an affidavit of undertaking dated 29-9-2016 wherein he undertakes that in terms of the joint memo, he has agreed to vacate the schedule premises on or before 31st March, 2017 and he will not sub-let, create any third party interest or cause any encumbrance on the said premises. He has also agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees six thousand only) per month towards rent for the schedule premises from October 2016 to March 2017 to the respondent.

4. Today, the petitioner-tenant has paid a sum of Rs. 18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen thousand only) by way of cash to Sri B.C. Renukaradhya - General Power of Attorney holder of the respondent in the open Court towards arrears of rent. Power of attorney holder of the respondent acknowledges the receipt of Rs. 18,000/- from the petitioner.

5. In view of the joint memo filed by the parties, and the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner, the civil revision petition is disposed of by modifying the impugned order dated 1st September, 2016 passed in HRC No. 16 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, in terms of the joint memo.

It is needless to observe that in case of any violation of terms of the joint memo, it is always open to the respondent-landlord to approach this Court.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //