Court upheld landlord's right to enforce lease terms due to tenant's chronic payment defaults and valid notice of termination, emphasizing binding lease obligations and authority of plaintiff's representative.

JUDGMENT :

M.G. UMA, J.

The appellant in these appeals being defendant No.1 in OS.Nos.7776/1998, 7775/1998 and 7777/1998 on the file of the learned XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred as to 'the Trial Court' for short), is impugning the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2010, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for possession and for arrears of rent and directing defendant No.1 to vacate the premises and to hand over the vacant possession to the plaintiff within four months from the date of judgment and also to pay the arrears of rent and continue to pay the periodical rent.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their rank and status before the Trial Court.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the plaintiff filed the suit OS.No.7776/1998 before the Trial Court against the defendants seeking vacant possession of Schedule-B property and for arrears of rent and other dues i.e., a sum of Rs.58,772/- with interest at 18% per annum till realisation and also to pay periodical rent during the pendency of suit. Schedule-B attached to the plaint describes 1,870 sq.feet of office space identified as No.6-C on the 6^th floor of the multi storied building, Chitrapurbavan situated at No.68 (old No.742), 8^th Main Road, Malleshwaram (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule property'). Schedule-A attached to the plaint describes the entire piece and parcel of their land, bearing Corporation No.68 (old No.742) situated at 15^th cross of which Schedule-B property is a portion.

4. It is the contention of the plaintiff that it is a Charitable Institution as defined under Hindu Charitable and Endowments Act. It is a Public Religious Trust registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act, having its Central Office at Shiralikkanara, Uttar Kannada District and it also has a branch at Bengaluru. The plaint is signed by the authorized signatory.

5. It is stated that the provisions of Karnataka Rent Control Act is not applicable to the premises as the plaintiff is a Charitable Trust. Defendant is a Private Limited Company incorporated under Company Act, 1956, of which, Smt.Shobana Rao is the Managing Director and is representing the Company.

6. The plaintiff contended that it is the absolute owner in possession of Schedule-A property. During 1980, the plaintiff formed a scheme for construction of commercial complex in the portion of property, comprising of office premises and parking space. Accordingly, the construction was completed on Schedule-A.

7. Defendant was intending to open an office at Bengaluru and approached the plaintiff for providing the office space. The plaintiff agreed for the same. A lease deed dated 19.03.1991 was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant creating a lease for a period of 45 years in respect of Schedule-B property. As per the terms of lease, defendant was to pay an advance amount of Rs.4,57,500/- at the rate of Rs.250/- per Sq.ft, being interest free advance, which is not refundable on expiry of the lease period. Defendant agreed to pay rent at the rate of Rs.1.20/- per Sq.ft, totaling to Rs.2,244/- per annum. Defendant agreed to pay the same, quarterly in advance amounting to Rs.561/- per quarter. There was an agreement to increase the rate of rent by 10% once in five years. If the defendant commits default in payment of rent for over six months, the plaintiff is entitled to re-enter the premises and the defendant was duty bound to hand over the possession of the premises.

8. It is contented by the plaintiff that as per clause 4 of part-B of the lease deed, the defendant was also liable