Bangalore District Court M/S Sri Gururaja Enterprises Pvt.Ltd vs M/S Sudarshan Silk Palace on 8 March, 2021 1 O.S.NO.588/2010 C.R.P.67 Govt. of Karnataka Form No.9(Civil) Title Sheet for Judgment in Suits (R.P.91) TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS IN THE COURT OF THE XII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, AT BENGALURU Dated this the 8th day of March, 2021. PRESENT: SRI. SATHISHA L.P., B.A.,LL.B., XII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH.No.27), BENGALURU O.S.No.588/2010 PLAINTIFF : M/s Sri Gururaja Enterprises Pvt.Ltd., company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act 1956, having its registered office at No.173, Hotel Samrat, Residency compound, Subedar Chatram road, Sheshadripuram, Bangalore 560020, rep by its Director M.N.Narasimha Murthy Naik. (By A.K.S Advocate) VS. DEFENDANT : M/s Sudarshan Silk Palace, A registered partnership firm, Having its registered office at No.173, Hotel Samrat, Residency compound, Subedar Chatram road, 2 O.S.NO.588/2010 Sheshadripuram, Bangalore 560020, Rep.by its managing partner Smt. Komala Ramesh. (By R.B.R. Advocate) Date of Institution of the suit : 18012010 Nature of the suit : Ejectment Date of commencement of : 13102011 recording of the evidence Date on which the Judgment : 08032021 was pronounced Total Duration Years Months Days 11 01 20 (SATHISHA L.P.) XII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU CITY JUDGMENT The plaintiff is before the court for the relief of ejectment of the defendant from the A and B schedule properties, directing the defendant to quit vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the schedule premises to the plaintiff and recovery of arrears of rent amounting to Rs.9,00,000/ together with court cost and for an enquiry of mesne profits from the date of suit till the date of delivery of 3 O.S.NO.588/2010 possession and such other reliefs. 2. The brief history of the case is that, the plaintiff is the landlord of suit schedule A property. There is a lease of A Schedule property for the period of 30 years and rent is fixed at Rs.25,000/ per month with the condition that it should be enhanced by 5% for every ten years. But, in the said lease deed, in clause No.12, it is specifically stated " the lessee shall not commit any breach of the terms and conditions of this agreement. If the lessee commits any breach of the terms and conditions of this agreement, then the lessor is entitled to terminate the lease and reenter the schedule premises by giving six months notice in writing". In fact, clause2 of the said agreement a condition was imposed that monthly rent will be paid on or before 10 th of every succeeding month. If the rent is not paid for the month, the lessor has got right to terminate the lease irrespective of the fact the period of lease is for 30 years and the lessor has got right to reenter the possession. But the defendant has not paid the rent right from the inception of the tenancy. Hence, the plaintiff has passed a resolution 4 O.S.NO.588/2010 on 19092009 to terminate the tenancy of the defendant and also authorized the Director Mr.M.N.Narasimha Murthy Naik to file the ejectment suit and also for recovery of arrears of rent. The original lease deed is with the defendant. As the defendant committed the breach in payment of rent, under Section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act the tenancy was terminated and the defendant was called upon to redeliver the possession as the plaintiff is entitled to reenter the possession of the property.