SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Kar) 304

High Court of Karnataka
THE HONORABLE JUSTICE MR. H.BILLAPA
Photo Speed Company, Bangalore
Versus
C.H. Somashekar
Regular First Appeal No. 837 of 2009(RES-SJ)
Decided On : 18-03-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:M/s Jayakumar S. Patel Associates, Advocates.
For the Respondent:P.S. Shameel Ahmed, Advocate.

Headnote:KARNATAKA COURT FEES & SUITS VALUATION ACT, 1958 - Section 66: [H.Billappa,J] Refund of Court fee - Parties concerned filed compromise petition -Petition was allowed in terms of compromise - Ordered refund of Court fee permissible.

Judgment :

Sri Gul H. Gulrajani, the Proprietor of the appellant and Sri C.H. Somashekar, the respondent and the learned Counsel for the parties are present before the Court. They have filed a compromise petition, under Section 89(1) read with Order 23, Rule of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 which reads as under:

The subject matter of appeal was settled between the parties by the intervention of the Court on following terms:

(i) The appellant agreed to vacate and handover the vacant possession of schedule property by the end of August 2011.

(ii) The appellant shall pay a enhanced rent by way of damages, at Rs. 15,000/- per month from 1-4-2010 to 31-8-2011.

(iii) The appellant is permitted to clear all debris, garbage, waste, stagnating water from time to time from the roof of the schedule property and carry out such repairs to plug the leakage of water from the roof into the schedule property, the appellant is further entitled to internally carry out, such repairs as may be necessary for protection of his goods and better interior appearance of the schedule property in view of this covenant, the appellant withdraws the O.S. No. 17564 of 2005, pending on the file of City Civil Judge, Mayo hall at Bangalore (CCCH-21), the respondent will withdraw O.S. No. 17115 of 2006, pending on the file of City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall at Bangalore (CCCH22).

2. Sri Gul H. Gulrajani, the proprietor of the appellant and Sri. C.H. Somashekar, the respondent, who are present before the Court admit the terms of compromise and its due execution.

3. The learned Counsel for the parties submit that the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the compromise.

4. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. The judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S. No. 16548 of 2005 stands modified in terms of the compromise. The appellant in granted time till 31-8-2011 to vacate the premises. The appellant shall vacate and deliver vacant possession of the premises to the respondent on or before 31-8-2011. The appellant shall pay the rents/damages at the rate of Rs. 15,000/-p. m. from 1-4-2010 till the appellant vacates the premises. The parties shall abide by the terms and conditions of the compromise.

5. The appellant shall file an affidavit, within two weeks from today, undertaking to vacate the premise on or before 31-8-2011.

Draw up the decree, in terms of the compromise.

Refund the Court fee permissible under Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top