M. SANJEEVA SHETTY Vs. HILARY MASCARENHAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 is filed challenging the correctness of the Order dated 31.07.2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.52208/2003.

(2.) The appellant herein claimed to be a collector of rent from the predecessor of the respondents who was the tenant.

(3.) The facts that could be gathered from the pleadings on record are that the land in question is 8 cents of punja land in Sy.No.123/10C of Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, which was owned and possessed by Sri.Mahalingeshwar Temple (hereinafter referred to as the 'temple'), Puttur, governed by the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowment Act, 1927. The Moktesar of the temple, had leased out a larger portion of the land in Sy.No.123/10C to one Santhappa Rai for a period of 55 years in terms of a rent deed dated 28.05.1923, which was duly registered. The said Santhappa Rai thereafter executed a lease dated 27.10.1932 in favour of Mr.Piade Mascarenhas for a term of 30 years, which was duly registered. Thus the lease in favour of Mr.Piade Mascarenhas expired on 27.10.1962. In the meanwhile, Mr.Piade Mascarenhas expired and the lease was continued by his son, Mr.Hilary Mascarenhas. Later the said Santhappa Rai assigned all his interest in the aforesaid premises to the appellant in terms of an assignment deed dated 03.05.1965 for a period of 12 years, which was duly registered. It is stated that Mr.Hilary Mascarenhas was paying the rent as agreed to the appellant and that the appellant was in turn paying the rent to the temple. Even after the year 1977 when the assignment expired, the temple had approved the assignment of the right by passing three rent receipts for the years 1982, 1985 and 1986 in favour of the Landlord, which discloses that the rent was received from the appellant on behalf of Santhappa Rai.