Back
2024 Supreme(Telangana) 148
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
M.G. PRIYADARSINI, J.
Syed Riazuddin – Petitioner
Versus
Sardar Bhagat Singh - Respondent
City Civil Court Appeal No.109 OF 2023
Decided On : 12-07-2024
For the Petitioner: Raj Kiran Pagadala.
For the Respondent: D. Srinivas Prasad.
IMPORTANT POINT
A tenant cannot make alterations without the landlord's consent, and failure to comply with court orders regarding rent can lead to eviction.
Headnote:
Eviction - Lease Agreement - Code of Civil Procedure Sections 15A, 18, 151 - The court interpreted the provisions regarding tenant obligations and the consequences of non-compliance, leading to the dismissal of the appeal against the eviction order.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rents against the defendants for failing to pay rent for several months despite a lease agreement. The defendants claimed they had made substantial payments and renovations without consent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the defendants had not complied with the court's orders regarding rent payments and had failed to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness, leading to the acceptance of the plaintiff's claims.
Issues: Whether the trial court erred in striking off the defendants' defense and whether the defendants were denied the opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that striking off the defense does not preclude the defendants from participating in the trial, but they failed to utilize their opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness.
Result: The appeal is dismissed.
JUDGMENT:
M.G. Priyadarsini, J.
Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2023 in O.S.No.86 of 2021 (hereinafter will be referred as ‘impugned judgment’) passed by the learned I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad (hereinafter will be referred as ‘trial Court’), the appellant/defendant No.1 preferred the present appeal to set aside the impugned judgment.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.
3. The respondent No.1/plaintiff filed O.S.No.86 of 2021 against appellant/defendant No.1 and respondent No.2/ defendant No.2 for eviction, recovery of vacant possession, mesne profits and arrears of rents in respect of suit schedule properties i.e., commercial property bearing premises No.6-1-87 consisting of third floor (constructed area of 1500 sft), portion of 2nd floor admeasuring 700 sft situated at Musheerabad X Road, Secunderabad. The brief averments of plaint are as under:
a) The defendants alleged to have entered into lease agreement in respect of above mentioned suit schedule properties vide registered document bearing No.646 of 2011, wherein the defendants alleged to have agreed to pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month exclusive of commercial and sales tax, electricity and water charges. Both the parties alleged to have agreed to pay property tax equally. The rent was agreed to be enhanced after one year at the rate of 20% and thereafter for the subsequent year at 5% on the enhanced rent and the lease period of 11 years commenced from 10.04.2011 to 09.04.2022. The monthly rent shall be paid on or before 10properties vide registered document bearing No.646 of 2011, wherein the defendants alleged to have agreed to pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month exclusive of commercial and sales tax, electricity and water charges. Both the parties alleged to have agreed to pay property tax equally. The rent was agreed to be enhanced after one year at the rate of 20% and thereafter for the subsequent year at 5% on the enhanced rent and the lease period of 11 years commenced from 10.04.2011 to 09.04.2022. The monthly rent shall be paid on or before 10properties vide registered document bearing No.646 of 2011, wherein the defendants alleged to have agreed to pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month exclusive of commercial and sales tax, electricity and water charges. Both the parties alleged to have agreed to pay property tax equally. The rent was agreed to be enhanced after one year at the rate of 20% and thereafter for the subsequent year at 5% on the enhanced rent and the lease period of 11 years commenced from 10.04.2011 to 09.04.2022. The monthly rent shall be paid on or before 10
b) In the year 2013 the defendants approached the plaintiff to take two rooms on the ground floor admeasuring 700 square feet and the plaintiff has agreed to lease out the same on monthly rent of Rs.10,500/- and the same was enhanced to Rs.30,000/- and thereafter the said rent is being enhanced from time to time @ 5% on existing rent and thus, the enhanced rent comes to Rs.38,000/-. The defendants failed to pay the rents from April, 2020 to October, 2020 @ Rs.38,000/- per month for seven months totalling to Rs.2,66,000/- in spite of repeated requests made by the plaintiffs. Hence, the plaintiff got issued legal notice dated 05.10.2020 calling upon the defendants to vacate the suit schedule property on or before 10.01.2021 and to hand over the possession to the plaintiff by clearing upto date rents. The said notices were got returned by the defendants as party left/unclaimed by managing the postal authorities. Despite issuance of said legal notice, the defendants neither vacated the suit schedule property nor gave any reply. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for eviction, recovery of vacant possession and for mesne profits.
4. After receipt of summons, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed their respective written statements and the brief averments of written statement filed by d
