The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the Judgment of the Court of ll Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District in OS No. 49812022, dt. 07tO8t2O23, pending disposal of the Review Petition in AS No. 50612023. IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the : rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour may be pleased to stay the execution of the Judgement and Decree passed in )S No. 499 of 2022 dt. 0710812022 llnd Additional District Judge Medchal \ alkajgiri District at Medchal and to pass Counsel for the Appellants VEDULA CHITRALEKHA SRI VEDUI.A SRINIVAS RED 1ESENTING SMT. Counsel forthe Respondent : SRI A RAJASHEKAR REI) )y The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT. WSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA - APPEAL SUIT No.S06 0F 2023 .IU_p.G!_rIEryt U'er I lon'bte Srnt. Justrce tirunleta D?ut El.do) This is an appeal filed by the appellants - defcndant Nos. I to 3, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated O7.O8.2O23 passed in O.S.No.498 of 2022 by rhc learned II Aclditional District Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri ar Medchal (for short "the trial Court").

2. The parties are addressed hcrein as Lhey werc arrayed in the suit before the trial Court for the sakc of convenicnce anil clarity.

3. The case of the plaintiff belore the trial Court is that hc is the owner of property bearing PIot No.l32, admcasuring 1000 Sq.Feet, situated at IDA Dullapatli and that the clefendant has entered into a lease agreemcnt ovcr the said prcmises on

01.11-2013. It is his further case that the plaintiff has delivcred possession in favour of the dclendant and as per the lcase agreement, the defendant had to pay monthly l-cnt bl/ 5trr of every rnonth and that the rents are to bc increased at 5% per annum. lt is further averred by the plair-rtiff ttrat dunng March/Aprit, 20 13, 2 AKS,] & I]ID,J As No.506 2023 the defendant has raised structure over and above .he first floor covering 50% of Lhe open area without taking the : rnsent of the plaintiff zlnd on lcarning lhe same, when the plainli I approar;hed the defendant, the defendant has agreed to increas: the rent by Rs.20,000/- u..e.l. May, 2015. It is his case thar t-re clefendant has paid the rcnts regularly for some period ancl t fter 2Ol7 he was irregular in p2,1,msn1 of rents and from Octol> r, 20 18, thc defendant stoppcd paying rents and that he has al o not shor,,,n any interest in renewing the Iease agreement and r t us, I he lease agrcement expircd on 30.10.2018 by efflux of tjmr He further submitted that l'rc :rpproached the defendant for : Lt rears of ren t and the <lcfe ndant has issued a cheque bearrng No (6161g dated

13.06.2018 for an amour-rt of Rs. 1,79,492/- and cl :que bearing No.000023 claLecl 05.72.2O18 for an amount of Rs.3, )g,870/_ an<1 thc same rverc dishonoured, thus, he issued r r tices to the defendants and in the mean-time defendant No.3 I rs addressed an email to the plaintiff requesting time till Febrtrz r y for making payment. Accordingly, the plaintiff has waited till 3t 03.2019 but inspite of repeatcd requests the defendant has ,o[ paid the arrears. The plaintifl further submitted that h,, requires thc premises for his sell occupation and since, the defr:: clants are ir-t occupation of the suit schedule property inspite o1 : tpirv of Ieasc periocl and without ltaying any arrcars, therefore, l.c got issued a ./ { 3 AKS,J & ETD,I A5 No.506 7C23 legal notice on 10.04.2019 calling upon the defendants to vacate the prcmises. The defendants. inspite o[ receiving the notice , havc not chosen to reply, nor they have vacatcd the premiscs. IIencc, the suit.

4. The defendants have not filed written statement inspite of expiry of statutory period, thereafter, the plaintiff has rrred an I.A.No.4B6 of 2O2O seeking arrears of rent and mesne prof-its. The dclcndant who is the respondent in the said I.A. has contested thc suid pc[ition by filing counLer and it was allowcd directing thc re spondents to pay the admitted rents till December, 2O2O @ Ils. 1,20,000/- per month with enhanced rent of 5Zo every year, within I O days from the date of said order. However, the defendant failed to comply the said directions, thereafter, the ptaintiff got filed I.A.No.609 of 2O2I praying rhe Courr to strike down thc defence of the respondents as they failed to comply with thc ordcrs of the Court and they further failed to file any written sta[ement in the suit. The said I.A. was ordered striking off the defense of the respondents therein, who are the defendants in the suit. Thus, they have not chosen to cross examine the witnesses also.

5. ( Based on the above pleadings, the trial Court has lramed the following point for consideration? \ \:- \*5 4 AKS,J & ETD,J AS No.5D6 2023 "Whether tlrc plainttff is entitled for euiction of tlu' lefendant from the suit schedule premkes and recouery oi vrears of rents as praged for?"

6. The plaintiff got examined as PW1 and got r .Lrkcd Exs.Al to A7. Bascd on the evidence on record, the tr al Court has decreed the suit directing the defendant to v r )ate the suit schedule premises and also has directed to pa]' . rrears of rent Rs.4,O0,000/- pcr rrronth lrom April, 2019 till the ,acaLion of thc premises and mesne profits at Rs.24,00,000/ ,r th interest at 24o/o per annum from November, 2018.

7. Aggricvcd by the said judgment and lecrce , dated

07.Oa.2O23, the present appeal is frled by the deler r ants. B. Heard the submissions of Sri Vedula Sri rivas, learned Senior Counsel rt:presenting Smt.Vedula Chitr:L :kha, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri A.Rajashekhar ledcly, Iearned counsel for the respondent.

9. The lcarned appellants counsel has subr: ttecl that the appellants have vacated the premises and further : rid the arrears of rent and thus, the cause in the appeal does not- s rrvive. { s AKS,] & ETD,] AS No.506 20Zf I0. The learned respondent counsel has fairly conceded that the appellants have already vacated the premises and also paid the arrears of rent.

11. Bascd on the above submissions, lhis Court frames the following point for consideration Whether the cause in the appeal survives?

12. POINT: a) The evidence of PWI discloses that there is a lease agreement, dated 0i.11.2013 under Ex.Al between the plaintifl and the defendant and PW1 has also deposed with regard to the terms of the lease and also payment of enhanced rent @ 57o every ycar. A perusal of the lease agreement discloses the same. The said lease agreement is not disputed by the defendan ts. The plaintiff has served legal notice under trx.A2 dated 10.04.2019. The plaintifls contention is that since the defendants failed to pay the rents, he issued legal notice on 10.04.2019 asking the defendants to vacatc the suit schedule premises. The postal receipts under Ex.A3 and the acknowledgment cards under Ex.A4 reveal that the legal notice issued by the plaintiff is served. Dxs.A3 and A4 provc that the said notices were sent to thc defendants and received by onc of the defendants. Ex.AS is the \lt- s +:nqi 6 AKS,J & ETD,] AS No.506 2C)3 ( '\., letter dated 20.O8.2021 and Ex.A6 is the letter datt < 06 ro.2021, the re citals of which support the contention of the p I Lintiff that he has bonafide rcquirement of the suit schedule prer-r r ;cs. Ex.A7 is the softcopy of communication dated 16.02.201') scnt by the defendant through e-mail requesting extension ol time for payment of arrcars. Thus, all this evidence suppor s the case of the plaintiff and that the defendant has kn,l'r cdge of the proceedings. b) The defendants have not hled any wrilten sta. ( ment but has filed counter in I.A.No.486 of 2o2o fiied by the plai r iff for arl'ears of rent and mcsne profits. The said I.A. was a Ix,'cd but the defendants herve not complied with the orders. t'-urther, the plaintiff filed an I.A.No.609 of 2027 which also \" Ls allowed on contest but tl-re defendants have not approacher I the appellate Court on the orders passed in I.A.No.609 of 2O2l st iking off their defence, thus, the facts as put forth by the llaintiff stand admitted by Lhe defendant. There is nothing lt lisbelieve the evidence of plaintiff. The leasc agreement itself ha:' rll thc clauses as deposed by PW 1. Therefore, the ptaintifl succc( ( s the suit and the trial Court has decreed the suit directing thi: clcfcndants to vacate the suit schedule premises and also has r LI'ccLcd to pay arrears of renl Rs.4,OO,OO0/- per month from Apri ' 2019 till the \ 7 AKS,] & ETD,J AS No.5o6 2023 vacation of the premises and mesne profits at Rs.24,00,000/- with interest aL 24o/o per annum from November, 20 l B. c) Tl-rc learned appellants counsel has contended that during the pendency of appeal, the appellants have vacated the premises and paid the arrears of rent while vacating the premises and the learned respondent's counsel has not disputed the said fact. The learned appellan ts counsel has further submitted that since they have already paid the arrears of rent, the decree of the triar court ivith regard to the arrears of rent and mesne profits becomcs infructuous. d) The learned respondent counsel, on the other hand, has fairly submitted that the defendants have already vacated the suit schedule pretnises and has not expressed any objection to the prayer of the appellants counsel. e) Having considered the submissions of both the counsel, this court is of the opinion that sincc thc suit fired before the trial Court was for eviction, payment of arrears and mesne profits and admittedly, [he apperlants herein have vacated the suit schedure premises and have also paid the arrears of rent and since, it is not disputed by the respondent,s counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the appeal does not survives and there is no 8 AKS,I & ETD,J AS No.506 2023 \- \r,a!t \r \ c pornt in keeping thc appeal pending any fur: Ler. point is answered accordingly.

13. In the result, the appeal is closed. No cosls Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pendinll in thrs appeal shall stand closed. To, Sd . L. LAKSHMI BABU t EPUry REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// l-r SECTION OFFICER Medcha L l The llAdditionar District & sessions Juge, Medchar Ma t rjgiri District, 2. One CC to Smt. VEDULA CHTTRALEKHA Advocate [()t 3. One CC to SRt A RAJASHEKAR ne OOi nOvocat" 1Or UC1 4. Two CD Copies ,UC] ASR /kam HIGH COURT DATED:1110712025 JUDGMENT AS.No.506 of 2023 { SI/i I C.,,J 1 AN 1 t]2 0 -k ; "'ii..v:,/ - .- -,::-, - - CLOSING THE APPEAL t 4 \,6