UCO BANK Vs. SURENDRA S/O BABURAO JAJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the concurrent judgments passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Gulbarga, in O.S.No.94/2013 dated 26.09.2013 which is confirmed by the judgment dated 19.02.2014 by the I-Additional District Judge at Gulbarga, in R.A.No.98/2013.

(2.) The brief factual matrix that emanate from the records are that,-

(3.) The defendant has appeared before the Trial Court and contested the proceedings. The defendant has not only denied the averments made in the complaint but also submitted that the parties have agreed that the plaintiff had to construct strong room and toilet in the suit schedule premises. In this regard, there were several negotiations between the plaintiff and the defendant, but the plaintiff did not adhere to the agreed assurance. In this regard, the plaintiff (defendant herein) has addressed a letter dated 30.12.2011 to the Zonal office and the defendant and his brother approached the Zonal office of the plaintiff Bank and then agreed for the construction of the strong room and toilet. It is further submitted by the defendant that the plaintiff Bank is a Nationalised Bank enjoys very good reputation and there is absolutely no intention on the part of the Bank to cause any loss to the defendant. The Bank is continuously paying rents to the defendant regularly as agreed upon in the earlier agreement and at no point of time, the Bank has stopped making payment as per the previous agreement with regard to the rent.