- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1484 OF 2017 (RES) BETWEEN: K.S.SUNANDA W/O LATE K.S.UDAYSHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO.49, 4TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, CHAMARAJAPETE, BANGALORE-560 053. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHARATH.S.GOWDA., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. PRAKASH UMBRELLA MFG. CO., 137/1, MAMULPETE, BANGALORE-560 053, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.ROOP CHAND. …RESPONDENT (SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED AS UNDER: Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT Sri. Sharath S. Gowda, counsel for the appellant, has appeared in person. 2. Notice to the respondent was ordered on 12.09.2019. A perusal of the office note depicts that the respondent is served and unrepresented. The respondent has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person. 3. This is an appeal from the Court of III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-25). 4. For convenience's sake, the parties are referred to as per their status and rankings before the Trial Court. 5. The short facts are these: The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant in O.S.No.7185/2004 for Ejectment on the file of III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-25). On the trial of the action, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 29.06.2013 decreed the suit and directed the defendant to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 hand over the vacant possession of the scheduled commercial premises within six months from the date of the judgment. It was also ordered that the defendant shall become liable to pay the mesne profits, subject to enquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 of CPC to be initiated by the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court, the defendant filed an appeal before this Court in RFA No.1598/2013 and the same came to be dismissed vide Judgment dated 06.03.2014 confirming the Judgment of the Trial Court, however, six months period was granted to the defendant to vacate and handover the premises in question to the plaintiff. The Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court have attained finality. It is said that after expiry of the months granted by the High Court, the defendant handed over the keys of the scheduled property and delivered vacant possession on 08.09.2014 in the pending execution petition. The plaintiff -initiated FDP proceedings in No.9/2014, seeking the drawing of a final decree following the Preliminary Decree dated 29.06.2013, passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.7185/2004. The FDP Court vide order dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 27.04.2017 partly allowed the petition and directed the defendant to pay Rs.8,66,500/- covering the period 01.09.2004 to 08.09.2014 within two months from the date of the order, failing which he shall pay the said sum with 18% interest per annum from the date of the order till it's complete payment. The plaintiff has filed the present appeal under Section 96 of the CPC to enhance the mesne profits awarded by the FDP Court. 6. Counsel for the appellant urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the appeal papers and the records with care. 7. The short point that requires consideration is whether the order of the FDP Court requires interference. 8. The facts are sufficiently said and do not require reiteration. The issue falls within a narrow compass and relates to the award of mesne profits. It is not in dispute that the suit was filed in 2004 and the defendant handed over the vacant possession on 08.09.2014. Counsel Sri. Sharath Gowda, for the appellant in presenting his argument - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 vehemently contended that the FDP Court has erred in assessing the rental value of the scheduled premises. He submitted that the appellant furnished the lease agreement (Ex.P.3) to ascertain and determine the prevailing rent of the scheduled premises; however, the FDP Court has ignored the material documents. I find force in the said submission. A perusal of Ex.P.3 reflects that the plaintiff was forced to take a property on a lease of a property measuring 19.2125 square meters to carry her business by paying a monthly rent of Rs.10,000/- since the defendant did not vacate the scheduled premises in time. The measurement of the scheduled premises is 23.71 square meters, which is larger in area. Hence, the assessment of the rental value by the FDP Court is not proper. Therefore, this Court deems it proper to reassess the rental value of the scheduled premises. The appellant has paid the Court fee of Rs.41,385/- (Rupees Forty One Thousand Three Hundred and Eighty Five only) and he is entitled to a refund of the same. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 The total amount of damages shall be paid by the defendant as under: From 01.09.2004 to 31.08.2006 (24 months X Rs.5,000/-) (unaltered) Rs.1,20,000/- From 01.09.2006 to 31.08.2008 (24 months X Rs.6,000/-) (unaltered) Rs.1,44,000/- From 01.09.2008 to 31.08.2010 (24 months X Rs.10,000/-) Rs.2,40,000/- From 01.09.2010 to 31.08.2012 (24 months X Rs.11,000/-) Rs.2,64,000/- From 01.09.2012 to 08.09.2014 (24 months, 8 days X Rs.12,000/-) Rs.2,91,096/- TOTAL Rs.10,59,096/- COURT FEE + Rs.41,385/- REASSESSED AMOUNT Rs.11,00,481/- 9. Counsel Sri. Sharath Gowda submits that as per the order of the FDP Court, the defendant has already paid a sum of Rs.8,66,500/-. Submission is noted. Reassessed amount Rs.11,00,481/- Less: Already paid Rs.8,66,500/- BALANCE RS.2,33,981/- 10. The order dated 27.04.2017 passed by the Court of III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25459 RFA No. 1484 of 2017 25) in FDP No.09/2014 is modified. The plaintiff is entitled to a reassessed amount of Rs.2,33,981/- with 6% interest from the date of filing of the FDP till realization. 11. Resultantly, the Regular First Appeal is allowed. The Registry is hereby directed to draw the decree accordingly. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18