ANMOLE MOTORS Vs. SHIVAM MOTORS PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 12.10.2007 passed by the District Judge, Korba in Civil Suit No.16B/07 (M/s Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Anmole Motors and another) whereby the suit filed by the respondent/ plaintiff has been decreed with costs.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff is a private company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its head office at Jabalpur (M.P.) and branch office at Industrial Estate, Sirgitti, Bilaspur (C.G.), which is under the management and control of the General Manager appointed by the respondent company. The General Manager of the respondent company has been authorized by the respondent company to sign affidavit and other documents as well as to file suit and to give evidence in Court on behalf of the respondent company. Appellant No. 2/ defendant is doing the business in the name of appellant No. 1 and is the sole proprietor of appellant No.1. The respondent/plaintiff company is the owner of land situated near New Bus Stand, Transport Nagar, Korba, bearing Khasra Nos. 184/1, 184/4, 187/2 and 187/9, total area 1.16 acres. The respondent/plaintiff is the authorized dealer of the vehicles manufactured by Telco.

(3.) PURSUANT to the said agreement, possession of the suit land was handed over to appellant No.2/defendant, who, after getting construction of the super structure done, started his business there, but failed to pay the monthly rent of Rs. 10,215/- of the land to the respondent/plaintiff. As such, 39 month's rent, amounting to Rs.3,98,385/-, for the period commencing from 1.4.2000 till the date of filing of the suit i.e. 30.6.2003, was due from appellant No.2 to the respondent/plaintiff. Before filing of the suit, notices demanding arrears of rent were served upon appellant No. 2, who replied the same and came out with a false case saying that the suit land was agreed to be sold to appellant No.2 for Rs. 5 lacs, but as the respondent company had taken a loan from the Bank of Baroda and documents of the suit land were pledged with the Bank, therefore, sale deed could not be executed and as such, it was agreed upon that till execution of the sale deed appellant No.2 will be paying Rs.20007- per year as licence fee to the respondent company. On this premise, appellant No.2 denied that he is liable to pay Rs.10,215/- p.m. as rent of the suit land. As such, on the basis of agreement executed between the parties on 12.8.2000 that a civil suit for recovery of rent for 36 months', amounting to Rs.3,67,740/-, was filed against the appellants/ defendants, because though 39 months' rent was due on the date of filing of the suit, but only 36 months' rent could be recovered as per provisions of Limitation Act, 1963 and the rent for the rest 3 months had become time barred by the time the suit was filed.