M/s. Allied Sales Corporation vs Sri. M. Jayaram

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.—Revision is by the tenant challenging the order passed by the XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore in SC 2725/2011. Premises in question bearing No. 61, Sadar Patrappa Road, Bangalore fetching a rent of Rs. 1,550/- is in occupation of the defendant/tenant who is said to have paid the security deposit refundable without interest at the time of delivery of vacant possession of the premises. Notice was caused on 22.11.2006 terminating the tenancy. After expiry of the service of notice, suit came to be filed. Matter was contested. Trial court having raised points for determination held that there exists jural relationship of landlord and tenant and there is due termination of tenancy. Having so opined, it has ordered for eviction by the impugned order dated 6.7.2013 granting two months time. As against this order, tenant is before this Court.

Heard the counsel representing the parties.

It is the submission of the petitioner''s counsel that the tenant has paid advance of Rs. 5 lakhs and they need sufficient time to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises.

Per contra, counsel representing the respondent landlord submits, he is struggling to get possession of the premises since 2006 and it is seven years from then. Petitioner has also got his own building and despite having his own accommodation which is ready for occupation, he is avoiding vacating the premises, which the petitioner has denied. Further, counsel for the landlord submits that he is ready to refund the amount deposited by the tenant and prayed for not extending any time.

Might be that the photographs have not been served on the petitioner''s counsel by the tenant with regard to existence of building. In the circumstances, petitioner is granted another three months time to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises and it is for the respondent landlord to return the deposit at the time of vacating the premise. Petition is disposed of.