&

DECREE

DATED

9.10.2012

PASSED

IN

R.A.NO.17/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE,

CHIKMAGALUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE

JUDGEMENT

AND

DECREE

DATED

2.1.2012

PASSED

IN

OS.NO.101/2008 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE

(SR.DN.) & JMFC, CHIKMAGALUR.

IN RSA NO. 2091/2012

- 3 -

RAMAMANI,

W/O. A. J. VENUGOPAL NAIDU,

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

JUDGEMENT

&

DECREE

DATED

9.10.2012

PASSED

IN

R.A.NO.18/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE,

CHIKMAGALUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE

JUDGEMENT

AND

DECREE

DATED

2.1.2012

PASSED

IN

OS.NO.102/2008 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL

JUDGE, CHIKMAGALUR.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

These second appeals are filed challenging the

judgment and decree dated 02.01.2012 passed in O.S.

Nos.101/2008 and 102/2018 on the file of the Additional

civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Chikkamagalur, and the judgment

and decree dated 09.10.2012 passed in R.A.Nos.17/2012

- 4 -

and

18/2012

by

the

Principal

District

Judge,

Chikkamagalur.

Parties are referred as per their ranking before

the Trial Court for the sake of convenience. The appellants

are defendants. The respondent is the plaintiff. The

plaintiffs filed suits for declaration, possession and

damages against the defendants.

It is the case of the plaintiff that the suit

schedule property described in the plaint schedule of both

the suits are the property measuring 17.5 ft x 18 ft. totally

measuring 1431 Sq.ft., situtated at Ward No.17, Municipal

Hospital Road, Chikkamagalur. The defendants are the

Class-I heirs of late S R Srinivasa Setty, who died on

16.04.2008. During his life time, late S R Srinivasa Setty

was the tenant of the entire premises, in which these suit

properties were the portions. Said S R Srinivasa Setty

was the tenant under one M L Narashimha Setty, who was

the owner of the suit property. After his death, his

children effected partition, in which the suit properties

- 5 -

were fallen to the share of his son M N Mohan. Late S R

Srinivasa Setty was paying rent during his life time to

M L Narasimha Setty. Thereafter, the said M N Mohan and

his minor sons sold the suit properties to these plaintiffs

under sale deeds dated 02.11.1992. After purchasing the

suit property, M N Mohan intimated the tenant S R

Srinivasa Setty that he is the landlord and also informed

him about the purchase of the suit properties under

registered sale deeds and to pay the rent in favour of the

plaintiffs. S R Srinivasa Setty agreed to pay the rent at

the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month and he paid the rent for

some time. The plaintiff filed HRC petition in HRC

Nos.13/1995 and 14/1995 for evicting S R Srinivasa Setty

from the suit properties. The said eviction petition came

to be allowed. Thereafter, S R Srinivasa Setty filed Rent

Revision Petitions before the District Court. During the

pendency of the Revision Petitions, the Rent Act, 1999

came into force. The suit properties are commercial

properties and plinth area is more than 14 meters and the

said revision petitions stood abated. S R Srinivasa Setty

- 6 -

filed a suit in O.S. No.11/1991 for the relief of specific

performance of contract. The said suit was decreed and

thereafter the plaintiffs preferred an appeal in RFA

No.363/2002 before this Court. The said appeal was

allowed and the judgment and decree passed in O.S.

No.11/1991 was set aside and consequently, the suit filed

by S R Srinivasa Setty came to be dismissed. There was

the relationship of tenant and landlord between the

plaintiffs and S R Srinivasa Setty. The plaintiffs issued

notice terminating tenancy, in spite of termination of

tenancy, the defendants continued to be in possession of

the property. Hence, cause of action arose for the

plaintiffs to file a suit for ejectment, declaration, delivery

of possession and damages.

The tenants in both the suits filed a common

written statement contending that