LAXMIBAI HANUMANTSA HANAMSAGAR, Vs. NEETA ASHOK PORWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who are the tenants under the 1s t respondent filed the above Civil Revision Petition against the order dated 30.01.2015 made in Small Cause No.3/2012, O.S. No.248/2012 and O.S. No.249/2012, decreeing Small Cause No.3/2012 filed by the plaintiff, declaring that he is entitled for vacant possession of the property bearing CTS No.1579/B situated at Maruti Galli, Belgaum, measuring 255 sq.ft. within two months from the date of the order and also held that the plaintiff is entitled for mesne profit at the rate of Rs.150/ - per month from 21.09.2010 till the actual handing over of possession. O.S. No.249/2012 filed by the tenants is dismissed and O.S. No.248/2012 filed by the Land -lord is also dismissed in view of the decree made in Small Cause No.3/2012.

(2.) WHEN the matter was posted for orders, today, Smt.P.R.Bentur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Mrutyunjaya Tata Bangi, learned counsel for respondent No.1, filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, stating that the petitioners have admitted the ownership of the 1s t respondent and they have also agreed to pay the enhanced rent of Rs.5,000/ - per month, from 01.05.2015 till 30.04.2016 and they also stated in the compromise petition that, if one year time is granted to them, they will vacate and hand -over the possession of the suit schedule property in question to the 1s t respondent, without driving him to seek for possession.

(3.) RESPONDENT No.1, by General power of Attorney holder Sri.Ajay Ashok Porwal, is present and petitioner No.2 / Pandusa Gurunath Rajoli, petitioner No.3 / Maniksa Gurunathsa Rajoli and petitioner No.4 / Sri.Sakharam Gurunath Rajoli are present.