- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30780 WP No. 337 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 337 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ASHWIN KALLURU SOMAIAH S/O SRI. K.A. SOMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO. 728, LAKE RIDGE DRIVE, WOODBURY, MINNESOTA -55129, USA REP BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, DR. N.K. MALATHI, W/O SOMAIAH, AGED BOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1220, 18TH MAIN, 2ND A CROSS, J.P. NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 078. 2. SRI. D. PRABHAKAR AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS S/O DASANNA PRABHAKAR, R/AT GOO2, NISHANT DARPAN APARTMENT NEHARUNAGAR, 4TH MAIN, SHESHADRIPUAM BENGALURU - 560 020. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D PRABHAKAR.,ADVOCATE SRI. S.B. TOTAD., ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICATNT ON IA -1/2025) Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30780 WP No. 337 of 2024 AND: M/S UNIVERSAL COACHING CENTRE OLD NO.2922/20, NEW NO. 20 RAILWAY LINE PIPE LINE, CAR ROAD EXTENSION, WEST RPC LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 040. REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. UPENDRA SHETTY …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANIKETHENA K.M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VARAPRASAD K., ADVOCATES) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.09.2023, PASSED BY THE HONBLE LXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, (CCH-75) AT BENGALURU, IN O.S.NO. 7014/2016 ON I.A. NO.10, VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER The present petition is by the original plaintiff in O.S.No.7014/2016 aggrieved by the rejection of his application filed under Section 151 of CPC by order dated 19.09.2023 on the file of LXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-76). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30780 WP No. 337 of 2024 2. Sri. S.B. Totad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent is a tenant and has not been paying the rents to the petitioner. As such the petitioner filed application seeking direction to the defendant to pay the arrears of rent and damages. He submits that if the Trial Court without adverting to the settled principles of law, namely that the defendants being a tenant, not entitled to contest the suit without discharging his obligation of paying the rent, ought not to have rejected the application. Hence, he submits that there is error in the order passed by the Trial Court requiring interference at the hands of this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that the defendants has disputed the very title of the plaintiff and also disputed the jural relationship. He further submits that since the petitioner/plaintiff has not produced any material evidence justifying his claim for payment of rent/arrears of rents, the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the application. Hence, he submits that no grounds are made out seeking interference. 4. Heard and perused the records. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30780 WP No. 337 of 2024 5. Paragraph No.11 of the impugned order of the Trial Court reads as under: ''11. While perusing the evidence led by P.W.1 he has not produced any rental agreement to show that, there is a jural relationship between plaintiff and defendant and the plaintiff has not produced any document to say that, what is the rent fixed for month and when the rental agreement executed and when it expired and the plaintiff counsel also not produced any documents to show that, how many months rent the defendant has given to the plaintiff. When the vital documents not produced to prove the jural relationship between the plaintiff and defendant this court cannot opine to say that, there is a relationship between the plaintiff and defendant as owner and tenant at this stage. When the plaintiff has not produced any documents to show that, what is the monthly rent fixed to the defendant this court cannot believe the words of the plaintiff without the documents. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the AFFIRMATIVE. '' 6. Perusal of the aforesaid paragraph No.11 of the impugned order, would reveal that the petitioner/plaintiff though claims to be the owner of the property and defendant to be his tenant, apparently, has not produced any document with regard to the purported jural relationship that existed between them/plaintiff and defendants. He has also not furnished any details as to the rate of rents and arrears of rent, if any. 7. In the circumstances, no error or irregularity can be found in trial Court rejecting the application for the reasons - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30780 WP No. 337 of 2024 recorded/extracted hereinabove, warranting interference by this Court. 8. Reserving liberty to the petitioner/plaintiff to produce such evidence, as may be available and advised, in justification of his claim for being a landlord and in respect of arrears of rents, the petition is disposed of. 9. Sri. S.B. Totad, learned counsel at this juncture submits that presently the suit schedule property is purchased by one Sri. D. Prabhakar, during the pendency of the suit. Therefore, he be permitted to substitute the original plaintiff. He further submits that an application under Section 151 of CPC has been filed before the Trial Court and the same is pending consideration. The trial Court to consider the same and pass appropriate order. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2