M.F.A.NO.3592/2021

1

M

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3592/2021 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

MR.TOJO ABRAHAM

S/O P.J.ABRAHAM,

AGED 59 YEARS,

KALNADY FARMS,

MADDUR VILLAGE,

HANGALA HOBLI,

GUNDLUPET,

CHAMARAJANAGAR

DISTRICT 571 126.

& APPELLANT

(BY SRI KIRAN V.RON, ADV.)

AND:

MR.ROY ANTHONY,

S/O LATE A.P.ANTHONY,

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

KAVALAKATTU HOUSE,

SASIMALA POST,

PULPALLIPADICHARA VILLAGE,

SULTHANBATHERI TALUK,

WYNAD DISTRICT,

KERALA STATE 573 579

& RESPONDENT

(BY SRI SOMASHEKHAR KASHIMATH, ADV.)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF

CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.07.2021 PASSED ON IA

NO.2 IN O.S.NO.32/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL

JUDGE, JMFC, GUNDLUPET DISMISSING IA NO.2 FILED

UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151

OF CPC.

M.F.A.NO.3592/2021

2

M

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,

THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

Aggrieved by the rejection of his application (IA

No.II)

for

temporary

injunction,

the

plaintiff

in

O.S.No.32/2021 has preferred the above appeal.

2.

The appellant was the plaintiff and the

respondent was the defendant in O.S.No.32/2021. For

the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to

henceforth according to their ranks before the trial

Court.

3.

The plaintiff filed O.S.NO.32/2021 before

Senior Civil Judge, Gundlupet against the defendant for

permanent injunction to restrain him or anybody

claiming through him from entering into the suit

schedule properties and compensation of Rs.15 lakhs

and also to pay a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month till the

respondent withdraws from the schedule properties etc.

M.F.A.NO.3592/2021

3

M

4.

The subject matter of the suit are lands

bearing Sy.Nos.38 to 40, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48 and 50 of

Maddur

village,

Hangala

Hobli,

Gundlupet

Taluk,

Chamarajnagar District in all measuring 75 acres.

5.

On 24.11.2020 the plaintiff and defendant

entered into an agreement with regard to suit lands for

cultivation and crop sharing. As per Clause-1 of the

said agreement the defendant had to cultivate Banana

and Vegetable crops of temporary nature between

existing trees/plants from August-2020 to 31.07.2024.

In the agreement the plaintiff and defendant described

themselves as licensor and licensee respectively.

6.

As per Clause-2 of the agreement, it was

agreed that the defendant shall temporarily cultivate

Banana and Vegetable crops and plant coffee seedlings

without causing any damage to the existing trees and

other crops.

7.

Clause-6 of the agreement mandated that

such cultivation should be without causing damages to

M.F.A.NO.3592/2021

4

M

the coffee plantation or other existing crops of the

licensor.

8.

Clause-11 of the agreement prohibited the

defendant from storing or carrying any weapons, fire

arms, tools or articles of the destruction in and around

the premises and licensor has the right to prevent entry

of any person under the licensee if his/her entry or

behaviour or presence is found to be threat to the

interest of the licensor.

9.

Under Clause-20 of the agreement the

defendant agreed that the possession of the properties

at all times be vested in the licensor exclusively and

right of the licensee will be strictly confined to that of

mere license.

10.

Under Clause-23 of the agreement the

defendant further agreed that if any of his acts is in

contravention of the terms of the agreement or

detrimental to the interest of the licensor, the plaintiff

may order termination of the license by written order.

M.F.A.NO.3592/2021

5

M

11.

Within about 6 months, differences arose

between the parties. Under the notice dated 16.04.2021

the plaintiff alleged that the defendant has violated the

terms of