A second appeal under Section 100 of the C.P.C. requires the demonstration of substantial questions of law; mere disagreement does not suffice.

Judgment:

VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.

This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 30.08.2024 in A.S.No.1 of 2024, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam (“First Appellate Court” for short), confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 24.08.2023 in O.S.No.135 of 2020, on the file of VI Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam (“Trial Court” for short).

2. The appellant herein is the defendant and respondents herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.135 of 2020.

3. The plaintiffs initiated action in O.S.No.135 of 2020 with a prayer to direct the defendant to quit the leasehold premises, vacate it, surrender the vacant possession of the same to the plaintiffs within the stipulated time; to pay an amount of Rs.16,49,711/- together with interest at 24% per annum from the date of default towards rental dues; to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages to the plaintiffs for the unauthorized occupation of the plaint schedule premises; to pay the damages of Rs.55,000/- per month from the date of the suit till the date of vacation of the suit schedule premises for unauthorized use and occupation and to pay an amount of Rs.72,000/- towards maintenance charges.

4. The trial Court decreed the suit in part. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful defendant in the above said suit filed A.S.No.1 of 2024 before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court dismissed the appeal confirming the decree and judgment passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the unsuccessful defendant in the above suit approached this Court by way of second appeal.

5. For the sake of convenience, both parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.

6. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in O.S.No.135 of 2020, is as follows:

(i) The plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the Plot No.41 ad-measuring 465 sq. yards as described in the suit schedule. The 2^nd plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant styled as “Indenture of Lease” dated 28.07.2014 permitting the defendant to use the suit schedule premises and the same was reduced into writing on 28.07.2014. It was agreed between the 2^nd plaintiff and the defendant that the defendant has to pay a sum of Rs.19,500/- per month towards the lease rent and the lease period is 11 months commencing from 01.09.2024. The defendant has paid the landlord an amount of Rs.90,000/- by way of cheque bearing No.805388, drawn on State Bank of India, Siripuram Branch, towards the interest free refundable security deposit payable to the defendant as and when the defendant quits, vacates and delivers the vacant possession of the suit schedule premises/leasehold premises to the landlady/ 2^nd plaintiff after completion of the lease period by 31.07.2015.

(ii) The defendant did not honour the commitment as per the recitals of the lease deed and committed default in payment of the rent. The 2^nd plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay the agreed rental amount from 01.09.2024 to 30.06.2014 or otherwise vacate the suit schedule premises. In the said circumstances, the defendant deposited an amount of Rs.79,900/- on 28.07.2016 to the 2^nd plaintiff’s account and kept quite. The 2^nd plaintiff demanded the defendant to quit, vacate and delive