1
IN THE COURT OF THE VIII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE: CITY CIVIL
COURT: HYDERABAD.
MONDAY, THE 23 rd DAY OF MARCH, 2026
PRESENT: Ms. B. MANASA,
VIII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD
O.S. No.1832 of 2018
Between:
1.Smt. R. Kalavathi Das, W/o. R.S. Ranga Das (Died per LRs)
2. R.S. Ranga Das S/o. Late R. Sayanna, Aged 85 years, Occ: Business,
3. Smt. Ruchury Kamaleshwari, D/o.R.S. Ranga Das, Age 61 years, Occ: Housewife
4. Smt. Ruchury Andal, D/o. R.S. Ranga Das, Age 59 years, Occ: House- wife,
5. Smt. Ruchury Uma Maheshwari D/o. R.S. Ranga Das, Age 54 years, Occ: Housewife,
6. Smt. Sharada Kumar Peddi D/o. R.S Ranga Das, Age:53years, Occ: House Wife R/o. Plot No.297, Dugra Nivas Jalna Road, Opp. To Ajanta Ambassdor Hotel Road, CIDCO, Aurangabad, Maharashtra.
7. Smt. Ruchury Bramaramba D/o. R.S Ranga Das, Age:52 years, Occ: Business Plf no. 2 to 7 are R/o. 2-2-1137/3/c/1, New Nallakunta, Hyderabad (Plf No. 2 to 7 are added as per the orders in I.A No. 181 of 2023 dated 20-02-2023)
...Plaintiff
A n d
Md. Habeeb Hussain, S/o Habeeb Salam-Al- Hameed, Aged: 56 years, Occ: Business, Prop. M/s. Mona Collections, R/o. Shop No. 3, in premises no 18-9-31 to 36, Ground floor, Sri Kamakshi Bhavan, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad-500005.
...Defendant
This suit is coming before me in the presence of Sri. M/s. T. Bheem Reddy, Learned Advocate for Plaintiffs and of Sri. Mohd. Abdul Samad, 2
Learned Advocate for Defendant and the matter having stood over for con- sideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
This suit is filed by the Plaintiff against the defendant, praying this court to direct the defendant or his men, agents, or any one claiming through him to vacate and handover the vacant possession of plaint schedule property, shop in Defendant occupation as tenant, i.e Shop
No.3 in Ground Floor, in Premises No. 18-9-31 to 36, Sri Kamakshi
Bhavan, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad, more clearly shown in sched- ule of property and sketch plan delineated in red color, to the Plaintiffs along with fixtures and fittings. And also prayed this court to pass judgment and decree in favour of plaintiffs against Defendant for recovery of Rs. 19,500/- towards arrears of mesne profit for the period 01-07-2018 to 15-08-2018 and award future mesne profits @
Rs.13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Only) per month, the Plaintiffs undertakes to pay Court Fee on future mesne profits after determining the same. And also to pass Judgment and Decree in favour of Plaintiffs against the defendant for recovery of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thou- sand Only) towards Quit notice charges, in the interest of justice.
2. The brief averments of the plaint, in nutshell:-
The Plaintiff submitted that plaintiff herein is the owner and landlady of the entire Premises 18-9-31 to 36, consisting of Ground plus three floors, Sri Kamakshi Bhavan, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad, building known as Sri Kamakshi Bhavan. The ground floor of the 3 premises is consisting of Shops. The plaintiff submits that the shop no.
3 with carpet area 120 Sq.feets is in the occupation of the defendant and the same was let out to him. The plaintiff submits that in the year 2009, she filed two RC's bearing no 173/2009 for eviction on various grounds and RC no. 205/2009 for fixation of fair rent in respect of the
Shop no.3, which is under the defendant's occupation. It is submitted that the defendant herein is the tenant of the plaintiff in respect of shop no. 3 of the premises no. 18-9-31 to 36, Chandrayanagutta, Hyderabad.
It is submitted that, during the pendency of the above two RC.s on the file of the III Additional Rent Control, City Small Causes Court,
Hyderabad, the matter was compromised on the advice of the well wishers and common friends. The compromise memo was filed in above two RC.s on 5-2-2014. The compromise between the plaintiff and the defendant herein was reduced into writing and the same is recorded in
RC 173/2009 and in RC 205/2009 and both the RC's are disposed in
terms of the compromise without costs. As per the compromise recorded in above two RC's the defendant herein has agreed to pay rent at the rate of Rs.3,600/- p.m. from January 2014 and the defendant also agreed to increase the rent @ 10% over and above the existing rent after expiry of every twelve months. It is submitted that, by trusting the defendant, the plaintiff has entered into compromise with the fine hope that, the defendant will not cause any inconvenience to the plaintiff or her GPA, who is her husband. It is submitted that, the 4 tenancy between the plaintiff and the defendant is oral, the same is month to month as per English Calendar and the rent is payable in advance every month on or before 10th of the same month. It is submitted that, the plaintiff used to pass the rent receipts to the defendant as and when he tendered the rents to the plaintiff or her GPA.
It is submitted that, the defendant used to sign on the rent counterfoils after receiving the receipt from the plaintiff or her GPA. It is submitted that, the defendant has taken undue advantage of the plaintiff and her husband as they are senior citizens and harassing them in tendering the rents. The plaintiff submits that, the defendant is irregular in paying the rents and he has been harassing the plaintiff and her GPA in paying the rents. It is submitted that, the defendant has paid the rents, excluding electricity charges at irregular intervals as follows:
a) The rent for the month of June 2015 rent @ Rs.3,960/- paid on 21-7- 2015 i.e., after 1 month 10 days.
b) The rent for August & Sept. 2015 @ Rs.3,960/- paid on 14-9-2015.
c) The rent for November paid on 12.12.2015 after one month two days.
d) The Defendant has not paid December 2015 rent in time, but the same is paid on 11-2-2016 after two months instead of paying on or
before 10-12-2015.
e) The Defendant has paid rent for the month of November 2015 on 12- 12-2015 instead of paying on 10-11-2015.
f) The rent for January 2016 @ Rs.4,360/- paid on 11-02-2016, instead of paying on or before 10-01-2016.
g) The rent for February 2016 @ Rs.4,360/- paid on 16th March 2016, instead of paying on or before 10-2-2016.
5
h) The rent for March 2016 @ Rs.4,360/- paid on 20-04-2016, instead of paying on or before 10-3-2016
i) The rent for the month of April & May 2016 @ Rs.4,350/- paid on 11- 05-2016, instead of paying on or before 10-4-2016 for the month of April, i.e after two months two days.
j) The rent for the month of June 2016 paid on 18.07.2017, instead of paying on or before 10.06.2016.
K) The rent for the month of October & November paid on 20-12-2016 instead of paying on or before the 10th of the same month.
l) The rent for the month of December 2016 @ Rs.4,360/- paid on 23- 01-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.01.2017.
m) The rent for the month of January 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 17-02- 2017, instead of paying on or before 10.01.2017 of the same month.
n) The rent for the month of February 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 18.03. 2017, instead of paying on or before 10.02.2017 of the same month.
o) The rent for the month of March 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- p.m. is paid on 15-04-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.03.2017.
p) The rent for the month of April, May & June 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- p.m. paid on 29-06-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.04.02017, 10.05.2017 & 10.06.2017.
q) The rent for month of July 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 12-08-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.07.2017.
r) The rent for the month of August & September 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 16-09-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.08.2017, 10.09.2017.
s)The rent for the month of November 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 16- 12-2017, instead of paying on or before 10.11.2017.
t) The rent for the month of December 2017 @ Rs.4,800/- paid on 11- 01-2018, instead of paying on or before 10.12.2017.
u) The rent for the month of January 2018 @ Rs.5,300/- paid on 11-01- 6 2018, instead of paying on or before 10.01.2018.
v) The rent for the month of February 2017 @ Rs.5,300/- paid on 12-03- 2018, instead of paying on or before 10.02.2018.
w) The rent for the month of March 2018 is not paid at the time of issuing Quit, Notice, but the same was paid after issuing reply to the Quit Notice and the same was received under protest.
x) The rent for the month of April & May 2018 sent through M.Ο. @ Rs.5,300/- on 01-06-2018, the same was received under protest.
y) The rent for the month of June 2018 @ Rs.5,300/- is not paid at the time of issuing Quit, Notice, but the same was paid after issuing reply to the Quit Notice and the same was received under protest.
(All the above mentioned rents are excluding Electricity charges)
It is submitted that, the plaintiff has received the rents which were paid by the Defendant at irregular intervals and money order for two months rent under protest and without prejudice to her right and claim.
The plaintiff submits that, the Defendant is most irregular in tendering rents and made her to suffer to run from pillar to post. It is submitted that, plaintiff has also let out Shop no. 1 @ Rs.6,500/-p.m. to Syed
Yameen Uddin, shop no. 2 is let out to Mr. Bheem Gawda Patil @Rs.6,500/- and Shop no. 4 let out to Mayur Collections @ Rs. 8,800/- p.m., in the same building of the suit scheduled property i.e Sri
Kamakshi Bhavan, all the above rents are excluding electricity charges in respect of the above mentioned shops. It is submitted that, in April 2018, the plaintiff called the Defendant and demanded to pay the rent by increasing the prevailing rent in the same locality. It is submitted that, 7 the Defendant has agreed to increase the rent as per the prevailing rent in the locality and agreed to execute written rental agreement in favour of the plaintiff, failing which the plaintiff demanded the Defendant to vacate and hand over the possession of Shop no. 3 in the premises no.
18-9-31 to 36, Sri Kamakshi Bhavan, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad. It is submitted that, to the plaintiff's utter surprise, instead of executing the fresh rental agreement, as agreed by the Defendant and he has agreed to pay rent as per the prevailing market rent, the Defendant has deliberately sent the money order for an amount of Rs. 10,600/- mentioning that the rent for the month of April and May 2018 and the same was received by the plaintiff under protest, without prejudice to her right and claim. It is submitted that, the Defendant's acts and deeds will establish that he does not want to keep up with his promise as agreed to increase the rent and failed to execute the fresh rental agreement and he has failed to pay the arrears of rent in respect of the month of March and June 2018 amounting to Rs. 10,600/-. It is submitted that, the Defendant has failed to keep up his promise and failed to pay prevailing rent in the locality and the Defendant is irregular in tendering rents and the Defendant is a willful defaulter in paying the rents within time as agreed by him, as per the compromise memo dated 5-2-2014. The plaintiff has been demanding the Defendant to vacate the premises and pay the arrears of Rent for March 2018, June 2018. In spite of the plaintiff's repeated requests and demand, the Defendant 8 has not vacated the premises under one pretext or other and failed to pay the arrears of rent. It is submitted that, the Defendant has taken undue advantage of her old age and her husband's old age, making them to run from pillar to post. The Defendant being a tenant, failed to pay rent for the months of March 2018 and June 2018. It is submitted that, without paying the arrears of rent and prevailing market rent, the
Defendant has no right to stick on to the premises and carry on the business. The Defendant being a tenant is bound to pay the rent every month timely. It is submitted that, the plaintiff is no more interested in the Defendant continuing as her tenant in respect of the Premises under his occupation. It is submitted that, the plaintiff has been undergoing untold hardship and mental agony on account of the Defendant's illegal acts and deeds, for that the Defendant is liable to be evicted from the suit premises. It is submitted that, the Defendant's acts and deeds are highly objectionable and he is guilty of violating the oral terms and conditions as agreed by him. The plaintiff, therefore, issued quit notice on 10-6-2018, calling upon the Defendant to pay the arrears of rent for the months of March 2018 and June 2018, stating that, she has no intention to continue his tenancy and the present rent is Rs.5,300/-P.M in respect of commercial premises under the Defendant's occupation and the tenancy is oral and the same is month to month in according to the English Calender. By virtue of the provisions of section 106 of T.P
Act, the plaintiff has got right to terminate the Defendant's tenancy by 9 giving (15) days clear notice as the Defendant's tenancy is month to month. It is submitted that, the Defendant's tenancy is terminated by the plaintiff w.e.f midnight of 30.06.2018, depending on which date, the
Defendant considered as a date on which (15) days notice expires from the date of receipt of quit notice. The quit notice is served on the defendant on 13-06-2018 and the defendant has sent a reply notice on 27-06-2018, through his advocate with false allegations and in order to cover up his misdeeds. It in submitted that, the Defendant has failed to comply with the plaintiff's legal notice dated 10-6-2018 and failed to vacate the premises under his occupation and he has failed to pay the arrears of rent. It is submitted that, the Defendant is deemed to be a trespasser and an unauthorized occupant of the premises after determining the tenancy i.e., from 01-07-2018 and the Defendant is liable to pay damages and mesne profits @ Rn. 13,000/- (Rupees
Thirteen thousand only) per month from 01-07-2018 for hin unauthorized use and occupation till delivery of possession. It is submitted that, if any amount that is paid by the Defendant after the expiry of the quit notice period, it will not amount to Rent, but to be part of damages and mesne profits for unauthorized use and occupation of the Commercial Premises ie., the suit scheduled property. It is submitted that, any amount paid by the Defendant for the period after the expiry of the Quit notice period, if and when sent through Money order, shall not amount to waiver of Quit Notice dated 10-06-2018 and 10 shall be deemed to have been received under protest and without prejudice to the plaintiff's right and claim for eviction as a part of damages. The Commercial premises under the Defendant's occupation, is not governed by A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act., 1960, in view of notification G.O.MS.No. 636, dated 29-12-1983 issued by Government of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of powers conferred
Under Section 26 of the said Act, the Premises under the Defendant's occupation is exempted from the operation of Act No. 15 of 1960 as the
Rent is Rs.5,300/- and the premises is governed by T.P. Act. It is submitted that, the Premises under the Defendant's occupation is situated on the Main road of the Chandrayangutta leading to the
Srisailam Highway, which is in prime commercial area, which is the high-flying and leading business market. The premises under the
Defendant's occupation is located at prime business center of
Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad. The entire area is a commercial one and the market value of the rent of the Premises is more than Rs. 15,000/- p.m.. There is a good demand in that locality. The Defendant is liable to pay damages and mesne profits @ Rs.13,000/- per month for the
Premises from 01-07-2018 till delivery of possession to the plaintiff for the Defendant's unauthorized use and occupation of the suit scheduled premises. The plaintiff submits that incidentally, the ground floor portion,
Shop no. '3' with carpet area 120 sq.ft. in a commercial complex known as Premises bearing 18-9-31 to 36, Sri Kamakshi Bhavan, 11
Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad, which is situated in the prime business centre in Chandrayangutta main road, near to the all Education
Institutions, near to the Commercial Establishments, under the defendant occupation is located in the prime business area. As per the prevailing lease, in the same locality for the commercial premises, the defendant is liable to pay damages and mesne profits @ Rs. 13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Only) per month for the suit schedule property from 01-07-2018 till delivery of possession. The plaintiff submits that, as per the prevailing rent in the locality, the suit premises will fetch Rs. 15,000/- p.m. but, the plaintiff is claiming damages and mesne profits @ Rs. 13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Only) per month and the claim of damages and mesne profits are quite reasonable in comparing with the prevailing market rate in the same locality. Hence, the suit for possession and damages by way of mesne profits.
3. The brief averments of the Written Statement filed by defendant, in nutshell:-
The Defendant denies and it is true that the plaintiff is owner and landlady of the property bearing No. 18-9-31 to 36 consisting of ground plus three floors, situated at Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad. It is also true that there are shops on the ground floor. It is submitted that the defendant herein had obtained shop No.3 on rent from the plaintiff under a written Lease Deed on 21-12-1999 initially on a monthly rent 12 of Rs. 1,300/-. The defendant had also deposited a sum of Rs.
25,500/- with the plaintiff by way of a cheque bearing No. 688579 drawn at State Bank of India, Barkas Branch towards refundable deposit. That the rent was enhanced from time to time till 2009 and at that time when the rent was Rs. 1,800/- per month, the plaintiff had initiated rent control proceedings in the year 2009 vide R.C. No. 173 of 2009for eviction and R.C. No. 205 of 2009 for fixation of fair rent on the file of the III Additional Rent Controller at Hyderabad in respect of the suit schedule property. It is submitted that the during pendency of the above said rent control proceedings, the both the parties amicably settled the dispute in 2014, thereby the rent was enhanced from Rs.
1,800/- to Rs. 3,600/- with 10% enhancement every year and the period of tenancy was extended for a further period of 3 years The allegation that the defendant is causing inconvenience and harassing to lender the rents to the plaintiff or her GPA is absolutely false and baseless. hence denied and the plaintiff is put to strict proof of the same. It is a fact that whenever the plaintiff or his GPA/representative used to come to collect the rent he used to tender and obtain receipt in token of payment of rents. It is submitted that whenever the representative of the plaintiff used to come at suit property, the defendant used to pay the rent and representative used to pass the receipts. The defendant has been very prompt and punctual in payment of monthly rents and he is not at all in due of any month rent 13 till date. The allegations that the defendant never tendered or paid the rents in time is absolutely false and baseless, hence denied and the plaintiff is put to strict proof of the same. Further in reply to para No. 5 of the plaint the allegations that the defendant is irregular in payment of rents is false and baseless, hence denied, the allegation that the defendant did not pay the rent for March and June, 2018 is absolutely false and baseless. It is submitted that neither the plaintiff nor her representative came forward to receive the rents from March 2018 to brand the defendant as a defaulter as such the defendant has been remitting the rents through Money orders promptly without any default which the plaintiff has been receiving the same. The defendant had sent rent from March 2018 till December, 2018 @ Rs. 5,300/- and from
January, 2019 as per the compromise and oral understanding enhanced 10% and remitting the rent @ Rs. 5,830/- till date deducting
Money Order charges which the plaintiff is receiving the same without any objection. The defendant being an old tenant and as such the plaintiff had come to an oral understanding with the defendant that he shall not vacate the suit shop for ten years from January, 2014 since the defendant had invested a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- for interior decoration and the plaintiff had orally extended the tenancy for 10 years from 2014, therefore the present suit and notice is a premature.
It is submitted that Syed Kareemuddin who was running business in shop No.1 has vacated the shop since the vicinity in which the suit 14 property is situated is not at all a commercial place, he was getting huge losses in the business because of the location. The other tenants of the shops are not paying the rents as shown under para reply. The figures are imaginary and the plaintiff is put to strict proof of the same.
Further in reply to para 6 and 7 of the plaint the allegation that the plaintiff called the defendant in April, 2018 and demanded to increase the rent and defendant agreed but did not come forward to execute written rental agreement etc are imaginary to color up the suit, hence denied absolutely false and baseless. The allegations that the defendant did not keep his alleged promise in executing fresh rental agreement at the rate of prevailing market value and did not pay the rent for March, 2018 and June 2018 is absolutely false and baseless, hence denied. The allegation that the plaintiff has been demanding the defendant to vacate the suit property and pay the arrears of rents but the defendant is taking undue advantage of old age of the plaintiff are absolutely false and far away from the truth. The allegations that the acts and deeds of defendant are highly objectionable, violating the oral terms and conditions as agreed etc is a created story. The notice dated 10-06-2018 is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 106 of
Transfer of Property Act and it is a premature notice when the tenancy is in force, hence notice and termination of tenancy are bad under law and the plaintiff is not at all entitled to any relief claimed in the present suit. The defendant herein has given a suitable reply on 27-06-2018 to 15 the notice dated 10-06-2018 issued by the plaintiff. The allegations that the defendant is a trespasser and the plaintiff is entitled for mesne profits @ 13,000/- per month is absolutely false and imaginary. The tenancy of the defendant is in force and the suit is premature. The allegation that the suit property is situated on main road leading to
Srisailam Highway at prime business center and commercial one and the prevailing rent is more than Rs. 15,000/- per month are imaginary false and baseless, hence denied. The rent which the defendant is paying is as per the strict terms of the compromise and oral understanding which is more than prevailing rent in the locality for the same shop. It is submitted that there is no cause of action arose against this defendant herein to institute the above suit, the suit is a premature one and the dates are false and imaginary. The suit is under value and Court Fees paid is less. All the allegations which are not specifically admitted hereunder shall be deemed to have been denied and the plaintiff is put to strict proof of the same. Hence it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court to dismiss the suit of the plaintiff with costs in the interest of Justice.
4.Considering the plaint pleading and written statement
pleading, my learned predecessor framed the following 3 issues:
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of eviction against
the defendants directing him or his men, agents or any one claiming
through him to vacate and handover the vacant possession of plaint
16
schedule property, shop in defendant occupation as tenant i.e., Shop
No.3 in Ground premises No.18-9-31 to 36, Sri Kamakshi Bhawan,
Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the recovery of Rs.19,500/-
towards arrears of mesne profit and award future mesne profits @
Rs.13,000/- p.m. and Rs.10,000/- towards Quit Notice charges from
the defendant?
3. If so, to what relief?
Admitted facts:
Plaintiff no.1 is the owner and landlady of the property bearing no.
18-9-31 to 36 consisting of ground plus three floors, situated
Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad. There are 7 shops in which the Defendant is in possession of shop no.3. There is no dispute with regard to the jural relationship between the parties as landlady and tenant, but only to irregular in payment of rents.
ISSUE NO.1:
Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of Eviction against the
Defendant directing him of his men, agents, or any one claiming through him to vacate and handover the vacant possession of plaint schedule property shop in defendant occupation as tenant i.e., Shop no.3 in ground premises No. 18-9-31 to 36, Sri Kamakshi Bhavan, Chandrayangutta,
Hyderabad?
1.1.This suit is filed for eviction, in eviction suit there must be satisfied 17 following ingredients… Jural relationship between the landlord and tenant Default in payments of rents Termination of notice 1.2.After demise of Plaintiff/ Smt R. Kalavathi Das during the pendency of this suit, her legal representatives i.e., Plaintiff No.2 to 7 are brought on record as per orders in I.A. No. 181 of 2020 dated 20-02-2023.
1.3.Initial burden lies on the plaintiffs to prove their case, for this Plaintiff
No.2 himself examined as PW1 and got marked Ex. A1 to A24. Defendant himself examined as DW1 and got marked Ex. B1 to B6.
Jural relationship:
1.4.The Plaintiff No. 1 is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and landlady, Defendant is the possessor of suit schedule property in the capacity of tenant was admitted by both parties in their chief and cross examination.
1.5.As per section 58 of Indian Evidence Act, 1882, “The admitted facts need not be proved”. Hence, this court opined that, there is no requirement of evidence to prove the jural relationship of parties as landlady and tenant.
Default in payments of rents:
1.6.PW1/ Mr. R.S. Rang Das stated in his chief examination that,
Plaintiff No.1, i.e., his wife/R. Kalavathi Das, before filing this suit she filed two Rent Control Cases bearing No. 173/2009 for eviction on various 18 grounds and RC No. 205/2009 for fixation of fair rent in respect of the
Shop No. 3 which is under the Defendant’s occupation as tenant before the Hon’ble III Addl. Rent Control, City small Causes Court, Hyderabad.
The above two Rent control cases have been filed by me as a GPA holder of the Plaintiff No.1 vide Reg. GPA Document No. 99/1984, which is marked as Ex.A23. it is further submitted that, during the pendency of the above two Rent Control cases, the matter was compromised on the advice of well wishers and common friends. The compromise memo was filed in above two RC’s on 05-02-2014. The compromise in between Plaintiff No.1 and Defendant was reduced into writing and the same is recorded in RC’s
No. 173/2009 and in RC No. 205/2009 and both RC’s are disposed in terms of the compromise without cost, which is marked as Ex. A1. As per compromise terms, the Defendant herein has agreed to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 3,600/- per month from January, 2014 and also agreed to increase the rent at 10% over and above the existing rent after expiry of every twelve months.
1.7.It is further submitted that, the tenancy between the Plaintiff no.1 and the Defendant is oral, the same is month to month as per English calendar and the rent is payable in advance every month on or before 10th of the same month. It is submitted that, Plaintiff No.1 used to pass the rent receipts to defendant as and when he tendered the rents to Plaintiff No.1/ his wife and the defendant used to sign on the rent counterfoils after receiving the receipt from Plaintiff No.1/his wife, which were marked as 19
Ex.A2 to Ex.A20.
1.8.It is further submitted that, the Defendant is irregular in paying the rents and taking advantage of old age, defendant has been harassing me and Plaintiff No.1/my wife in paying the rents and Defendant is a wilful defaulter in paying rents within time as agreed by him, as per the compromise memo dated 05-02-2014.
1.9.During the pendency of the above suit, the defendant has failed to pay the rents from June 2022 at Rs. 7,759/- per month up to December 2022 amounting Rs. 54,313/-. The defendant is supposed to increase the rent 10% on Rs.7,759/- and he is liable to pay the rents at Rs.8,535/- from
January 2023 to till June 2023 amounting Rs.51,210/-. The defendant is liable to pay rent @ Rs.8,535/- from July 2023 to till November 2023 amounting Rs.42,675/-. They filed I.A 1109 of 2023 U/O 15-A of CPC in
June 2023. After hearing the arguments in detail this Hon'ble Court was please to allow I.A No.1109 of 2023 on 30-10-2023 in our favour against the defendant directing him to pay all the arrears of rent to me through
Demand Draft after deducting the D.D Charges if any. The defendant failed to comply the orders passed in I.A 1109 of 2023.
1.10.In cross examination of PW1, he admitted that Defendant is paying the rents, even if in corona time also he paid the rents, but irregularly sometimes after due date and sometime once in two months.
1.11.In chief examination of DW1 stated that, he is regular in paying rents and whenever the representative of the deceased Plaintiff used to 20 come at suit schedule property to collect rent , he used to pay the rents and representative used to pass the receipts. He have been very prompt and punctual in payment of monthly rents and he is not at all due of any month rent till date. It is further stated that as per directions of this Hon’ble court I.A. No.1109/2023 dated 30/10/2023, he deposited the rents into the bank account of the husband of the deceased Plaintiff No., which are marked as Ex. B1 to B6.
1.12. Further stated that, he being in an old tenant and as such the deceased plaintiff had come to oral understanding with me that I shall not vacate the suit shop for ten years from January, 2014 since I had invested a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- for interior decoration and the deceased Plaintiff had orally extended the tenancy for 10years. Therefore, the present suit and notice are premature. Further stated that the shop No. 3 does not situate at commercial area.
1.13. In cross examination of DW1 admitted that, after compromise the tenancy has become oral. Further admitted that whenever he paid the rents the Plaintiff used to pass receipts and also he used to sign on the counter foil.
1.14. Further admitted that taking advantage of old age of the Plaintiff No.
1 and her husband/PW1, he being harassing them in tendering rent regularly as per the conditions specified in Ex. A1. He stated that, he does not remember from when he sending the rents to the plaintiff by way of money order and he admitted that, he has not made any efforts to tender 21 rent to the Plaintiff No.1 at her residence when GPA did not come to collect the rents to his business place. Further admitted that, he has responsibility to pay the rent as a tenant, when landlord does not come to collect the rents.
1.15.Further stated that, he did not issue any legal notice or registered letter to the plaintiff stating that she/ he are not coming to collect the rents as such he will send the rent by way of money order. He has not filed any document to show that he invested Rs. 5,00,000/- into the suit schedule shop. He has not issued any letter to the Plaintiff No.1 stating that lease was orally extended for 10years.
1.16.DW1 admitted that, from May, 2018 till passing an order IA
No. 1109/2023 in the present suit he did not deposit rent int the account.
Further admitted that the shop No. 3 is situated at commercial area.
Further admitted that there is no practice since inception of tenancy that the landlord use to collect the rents at his business premises.
Termination notice 1.17. Notice of termination under section of TP Act, was served on the defendant on 13/6/2018 and the defendant got issued reply notice dated 27/06/2018, but not vacated suit schedule property. With regard to termination of tenancy the defendant has not put forth any contention except simply denying the same either in his return statement or deposition.
22 1.18. In view of the above discussion issue no. 1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff.
1.19. During pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed IA No. 1109/2023 calming arrears of rent, to a tune of Rs.1,05,523/-, under Order 15Acpc.
My learned predecessor allowed the petition directing the defendant to pay arrears of rent as such there are no arrears of rent.
ISSUE NO. 2
Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the recovery of Rs.19500/- towards arrears of mesne profit and award future mesne profit @ Rs.13000/- per month and Rs.10000/- towards quit notice charges from the defendant?
2.1.The plaintiff claimed a sum of rs. 19,500/- towards past mesne profits for the period from 1/07/2018 to 15/08/2018 and future mesne profits @ Rs. 13,000/- per month. But reasons are not give to claim such a rate. Therefore the quantum of mesne profit will be decided on a separate application to be filed by the plaintiff under Order 20 Rule12 CPC.
2.2.As regards allowing quit notice charges to the extent of Rs.10,000/- cannot be granted because in eviction suits it is the obligation on the part of the plaintiff to issue quit notice or termination notice u/s. 106 of tp act, at his expences. Therefore the plaintiff is not entitled to claim quit notice charges. Accordingly issue no.2 Is answered.
ISSUE NO. 3
IF SO TO WHAT RELIEF?
3.1.In view of the above discussion the plaintiffs are entitled to seek 23 relief of eviction but they are not entitled to claim quit notice chargesof
Rs.10,000/-. As regards past and future mesne profits, the plaintiffs are entitle to reasonable profits, which will be decided on separate application to be filed by them.
3.2.In the result the suit, with regard to the relief of eviction, is decreed with costs, directing the defendant to vacate and handover vacant and physical possession of the suit schedule property, to the plaintiff, within 3 months from the date of Judgment. Failing which the plaintiff is at liberty to take over possession of the suit schedule property through process of law.
The quantum of mesne profits will be decided on a separate application to be filed by the plaintiff under Order XX Rule 12 CPC.
The suit with regard to recovery of quit notice charges is dismissed, without costs.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 23rd day of March, 2026.
VIII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE
CITY CIVIL COURTS, HYDERABAD.
24
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR Plaintiff: For Defendants:
PW1: Mr. R.S. Rang DasDW1: Habeeb Hussain
DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PLAINTIFFS:
Ex.A1 is the CC of Compromise Memo in C 173/2009, dt:05.2.2014.
Ex.A2 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:21.7.2015.
Ex.A3 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:14.9.2015.
Ex.A4 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:12.12.2015.
Ex.A5 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:11.02.2016.
Ex.A6 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:16.03.2016.
Ex.A7 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:20.04.2016.
Ex.A8 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:11.05.2016.
Ex.A9 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:18.7.2016.
Ex.A10 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:20.12.2016.
Ex.A11 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:23.1.2017.
Ex.A12 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:17.2.2017.
Ex.A13 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:18.3.2017.
Ex.A14 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:15.4.2017.
Ex.A15 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:29.6.2017.
Ex.A16 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:12.8.2017.
Ex.A17 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:16.9.2017.
25
Ex.A18 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:16.12.2017.
Ex.A19 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:11.1.2018.
Ex.A20 is the Original Rent Counterfoil receipt, dt:12.3.2018.
Ex.A21 is the Office copy of Quit Notice, dt:10.6.2018.
Ex.A22 is the Copy of Reply notice, dt:27.6.2018.
Ex.A23 is the CC copy of GPA dt:06.4.1984.
Ex.A24 is the Rough Sketch Plan of Suit Schedule Property.
DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENDANTS:
Ex.B1 is the Original Bank Statement dt:26.12.2023.
Ex.B2 is the Original payment receipt, dt:23.12.2023.
Ex.B3 is the Original payment receipt, dt:08.1.2024.
Ex.B4 is the Original payment receipt, dt:09.2.2024.
Ex.B5 is the Original payment receipt, dt:12.03.2024.
Ex.B6 is the Original payment receipt, dt:12.04.2024.
VIII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE
CITY CIVIL COURTS, HYDERABAD.