K.S.MUDAGAL
INDRAVATHI SRINIVASAN – Appellant
Versus
SUNITHA VENUGOPAL – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.S. Mudagal, J.
1. Aggrieved by the rejection of their application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, the plaintiffs have preferred this petition.
2. Pending this petition, the sole plaintiff/ petitioner died. On her death her son Prashanth who was initially arrayed as respondent No. 3 in the case was transposed as petitioner No. 2. Her other legal representatives were brought on record as petitioner Nos.1(a) to 1(c).
3. The petitioner Indravathi's husband was the owner of residential bungalow consisting of six bedrooms constructed on site No. 391 in block No. III in Koramangala, Bengaluru. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 entered into lease agreement with respondent No. 1 in respect of the suit schedule property on a monthly rent of Rs.1,30,000.00. The petitioners claimed that the said rent agreement was for a period of 11 months, which was extendable for another 11 months and thereafter, at the option of the petitioners.
4. Petitioner No. 1 got issued notice to respondent Nos.1 and 2 as per Annexure-D dated 05 07.2016, terminating the tenancy and calling upon them to handover the possession of the property. They also claimed that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are making a false claim of perpetual
Charanjit Lal Mehra vs. Kamal Saroj Mahajan
Hariom Agrawal vs. Prakash Chand Malviya
Karam Kapahi vs. Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust
Payal Vision Ltd. vs. Radhika Choudhary
Saroj Anand vs. Prahlad Rai Anand
Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.