fl,5f.R,P.flo.509[200§ &
H.R R.P.No.5 0 005
IN THE HIGH CGURT OF KARHATAKA AT
DATED Tms TI-IE um an or MARCH : %- "
EEFORE
THE Howsnaz MR.JUsTzcE:ti;'G;'FAafi:1E8;IiATV:" V
House Rent Revising Petitiofi.flo,A$09'["V 2gg¢s %
AND'.,_x'
House a t Rev'sitm no.5 o{%%2oa§
BE'I"WEEH:
SR1 MEJRALEDHAR
PROP: MURAL! ADVERTISEES § _V
SR1 VENKATESHWAREX §;=u:L;)I1vzG _ V
31-19 FLOOR, NC).16»,"--D§'V;CiL}N"£}APPA F?_OA_]"_> '
ERASAVANAGUDJ; ' ',
BANGALQ§EE--O4"'j. ..PETITIOHER
'1. . . (COMMON)
{BY SR1 Gig,v1swANg;'bé:A1ézE.:§:3:f,~ADvo<;:A'1'E.)
AND: V_ _v
" "SR: ;¢;f §URES14%%_ u ..... 14 »
SfO_LA'.1'E "*;ENKAf1'ANARAYANA RAD
'--R;'.AT"N0.-?.9*2;'5,( 1*, .3 ASHRYTHA
B:xN.ssHm'x--;5R: V"g$tisrAGE, I1 BLOCK
BANGALORE-»E30 ..RESPONBEH'!'
. . . " A (COMMON)
. _' 33? SR1 e.gJ;MAHEsH, ADVOCATE.)
VTLTHESE H.R.R.i7-'*3. ARE FEED UIS. 46 OF K.R.A(L'1'
" _Aa.:.A:--:a:ss.*r THE COMMON ORDER DATED: 28.9.2095 PASSED IN
'~ "~i~iRLfJ.NOs,682 85 533 OF 2003 RESPECTEVELY, em THE FILE OF
»'IfH..?i 11 ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, BANGALORE,
'gntsmzssmcr, THE PETITIQNS {HS 27 (2) {a} OF K.R.AC'E' AND
' ~ ALLOWING THE PETITIONS 11/3 27 (2) {r} OF' K.R.AC'T FOR
EV] GTE ON .
THESE PE'I'ITiONS cozvxme ON me HEARING_'vTE!$7.._
DAY. THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These two revision peti1:ions:;*;:i’e”t:’._i1je-:;te(I
the common order dated f28T,O9.2a(3Oé.”.V};)aseegi’ by=
trial Court — the Court of ‘-Addxl. smai;
Judge, Bangalore, in 6s3%V’oi”‘%:20o3
resP€C’!:ive1y. ‘A ” V ‘L %A
2. that the
parfies accordingly, a
joint meelo today. They pray
that the revieien’ be disposed of in terms
V of tt1e4_joim; memeiii mcciiiication of the common order
The joint memo reads as follows:
_ to the above Petitions have
mutuf;zit;4′.1’aAgreed to settle the pending dispute.
The” 3 parties have agreed that the
” Tenant shall keep the mam No 13
tag the suit property in H.R.I-?.P 510/2006 for
his use and occupation for a period of three
years from today. The Petitioner/Tenant has
W
._ ‘iwititin four weeks fi’om today. The
I Lcmdiord has also agreed for the
” ff {hazy “have no objection to dispose of the
subject to the above settlement. The
fl,fl,8,P,flQg§09,g’200§ Q
H.R,R.P.N0.510/2006
agreed to veluntarily vacate the said premises
by the 11*’! day of March 2012 without driving
the Respondent/Lcmdlord to file any Execuu’o;af {ff
Petition. The Petitioner/ Tenwzt has ~
pay the enhanced monthly reneof Rs¢4;94(.}9,(é’*T~::: _
to the E
Petitioner] Tenant shall _ V’
Rs.4,000/- either through or
draft to the Landlord on o(_4_il5’e,fore_
every English
default. If pemm; any
default _in–:: e we the
Responc;er§’£,{_lci§9@ciior<§i_ get right to
effect.
.A 1 has agreed to
withe2’mLa* the room No 16 i.e.
Suit prepefty eineeH.e;é.1e;eP 509/2005. The room
£§’e,1§A’sf;ai£V.’be and handed over to the
” parties’ to these petitions submit that
&
H.g.g.P.m.510,:;2_005
Landlord has agreed to shit the electricity
connectrbnfiom room No 16 to room No 13. ”
3. The above joint memo is placed on
submitted by the learned counselj gr; .4
joint memo is treated as the
petitioner-tenant and the «TR:
revision petitions stand femngs the
joint memo in V fibmmon order
impugned herein._ ‘
Revisidn piiiitibiis. of,
sdl-§__