IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2673 DAY 01? AUGUST 2003p» j
BEFORE
THE HOPPBLE MFLJUSTICE s. ABDUL _ " V
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL7-N0,;Ae212i2§G7'" 'A
BETWEEN :
Sri. T.S. Ramcsh Babu .
S/o. (}.V. Srinivasaiah V
Hindu, Aged 52 years _T '
Proprietor ofSriuidhi Tradcps '
S.C. Rudrappa j' _ '
Railway StatioIr_'VRci;i::E' "
Tipttlr-57§;E);i'1'1.<__ " WAPPE-LLANT
(By
AND ;
.. /0. SC. Rzzcifzgppa
" Hit1du;'*agcd 58 years
V _ 's.«_f-.1;-33; Gdigvrish
' _ " ._S/yd; S,C;~:Rudrappa
' _ Hind.11'," -agcd about 39 years
R~-{and 2 are r/a No.198/2
.. Vixiayakanagar
'*i1'i;;t1u~'1'a1u.k -- 5?;;1g2p1 R1138}-'ON DENTS
Shankaralingappa Nagaraj, Adv.)
1"' day of each calendar month and ends on the last dazfef
every month. The plaintiff's have issued a legal ~
10.05.2004
terminating the tenancy of the defen(i’a,:r1t.ff”!;he ‘ ‘
defendant has filed written statemefit “d.en§f.ing<
tenancy commences fmrn the 1"
calendar month and ends on the.DIa.3t deyeof
It is further contended that "the teiiax1cy" not
pro-mr.
3. On ;p1ea;ii1Aé’gs,_the Txtiai Court has
framed ”
” .» ‘peeve that they have
4′ _ “.the tenancy of the
de_fendei.:tV’? A _ V
A V’ Whefixezr defendant proves that the
‘% ‘ «_ is maintainable in original side :>
the plaintifis pmve that they are
‘j_ the vacant possession of the suit
property ?
n 4.” L What order or decree ?
Kn
aw
the plaintiffs as per Ex.P1 satisfies the 1equiren1ent.pé~s_
contemplated :1] s. 106 of the Transfer of Ptopertpies” ~
The Trial Court on proper appreciation of the ‘ M
Iecoxzi has directed the defendant to”mv’etcate’..p
vacant possession of the premises v’53;1:’«qi1estio;3. “to «. V’
piaintiff. The Lower Appellate
the evidence on record decxee: The
concunent findings of fact’ below is
on proper appreciatioo of and there
is no perversify’ those findings.
The question of
law. Therefore, iiable to be clisnrfmsed.
“(kt Counsel for the appellant
to vacate the suit schedule shop.
to.”_th’e facts and circumstzances of the case, I
t am that the appellant should be granted 1
t’ ” ‘T time to vacate the suit schedule shop subject to
of enhanced damages for use and occupation of
tl_1c..suit schedule shop.
\x
K
7. In the msult. I pass the following order:
i) The appeal is dismissed.
ii) The appellant] defendant is granted j”
31.12.2009 to vacate and hand over :3_1.1it.schc_ci1V1’1cé”
the mspondentsl plaintflfs subject to the: Cbnfiiition ?f
appellantldefcndant should at
Rs.900f- p.m., w.c.f. 01.09.2008, of
the suit schetzlule: shop. I .. A 3 bA b
iii) The to file an
afidavit in from today
undertaking schedule shop on
or before he not induct any thilti
parties inn; ‘ 1&6’ ‘ costs.
Sd/-
Iudge