POINT OF LAW:POSSESSION – WHEN the defendant is bound to surrender vacant possession, naturally, he is liable to pay damages for use and occupation

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S. Rules r/w Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure for a direction

(a) directing the defendant to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the schedule property to the plaintiff;

(b) to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- towards damages for unauthorised use and occupation of the schedule property from 21.08.2010 till 20.11.2011 and to continue to pay Rs.1,00,000/- per month from the date of filing of plaint till the date of vacating and delivering vacant possession of the schedule property to the plaintiff together with interest @ 18% per annum and

(c) to direct the defendant to pay the costs of the suit.)

1. This is the suit for directing the defendant to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit property to the plaintiff and to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.15 lakhs towards damages for unauthorised use and occupation of the suit property from 21.08.2010 till 20.11.2011 and to continue to pay Rs.1 lakh per month from the date of filing of plaint till the date of vacating and delivering vacant possession of the schedule property to the plaintiff together with interest @ 18 % per annum and also for costs.

2. The averments made in the plaint are in brief as follows:

The plaintiff is a Company engaged in the business of manufacturing Sodium Silicate and other chemicals and it is having its factory at Karaikal District in the Union Territory of Puducherry and also at Boothangudi in Nagapattinam District, Tamil Nadu. The defendant is the Proprietor of one M/s.Madras Chemicals which has got its manufacturing Unit adjacent to the plaintiff's factory at Boothangudi. As such, the defendant's father J.C.patel had befriended the plaintiff's Chairman.

(b) The defendant ran into financial difficulties and during June 2009, the defendant approached Shri.Mr.M.S.Jain, the plaintiff's then Managing Director stating that his properties being the factory at Boothangudi, Nagapattinam District and his house property at Spur Tank Road, Chennai, (suit property) were under the threat of auction sale by the Debts Recovery Tribunal on recovery action initiated by the Bank of India, Mylapore, Chennai, as he defaulted in repayment of loan borrowed from the said bank and requested the plaintiff for support. Further, he stated that if properties were to be dealt with by the court auction proceedings that they would be sold for a paltry sum in which event his situation would only further worsen and requested the plaintiff to extend a helping hand by accepting to pay the bank and purchase the suit schedule property. Considering the position of the defendant, the plaintiff accepted his offer and paid a sum of Rs.90 lakhs on 06.06.2009 by way of two cheques –

(1) State Bank of India Cheque No.978215 for Rs.30,00,000/- and

(2) ING Vysya Bank Cheque No.754151 for Rs.60,00,000/- and a sum of Rs.3.25 lakhs on 22.09.2009 by way of ING Vysya Bank Demand Draft No.611687 to the Bank of India on behalf of the defendant. Thus the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.93,25,000/- by September 2009.

(c) The total sale consideration for the suit schedule property was Rs.1,06,67,000/- out of which the plaintiff had paid Rs.93,25,000/- to the Bank of India on behalf of the defendant. The balance sale consideration of Rs.13,42,000/- was paid in cash to the defendant on 21.06.2010 and the defendant executed the sale deed. The defendant also handed over the original documents of title pertaining to the suit property to the plaintiff. At the time of executing the sale deed, the defendant requested for some reasonable time for vacating the suit property and to hand over vacant possession to the plaintiff as he has to identify an alternative accommodation and make arrangements for shifting his residence, which was readily agreed to by the plaintiff by granting two months time.

(d) Though the defendant executed the sale deed on 21.06.2010 in the presence of witnesses and promised to come to the Sub-Regi