JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The defendant in OS No 1391/89
Second Additional Judge City Civil
Court at Hyderabad is the revision petitioner.
The respondent herein filed the
suit for eviction of the defeadant from
the premises bearing No. 4-8-495 at
Gowliguda Hyderabad and Rs. 8.000/-
towards past mesne profits. During the
pendency ef the suit he filed I A 265/90
u/sec. 151 CPC praying for a direction to
the defendant to deposit Rs. 19,200/-
towards the arrears of rent from March
1989 to February 1990 at the rate of Rs.
1600/- per month for the plaint schedule
property and for further direction to
defendant to continue to deposit at the
same rate for each month during the pendency
of the suit. The lower court
allowed the petition as prayed for. This
revision petition was filed challenging the
said order.
(2.) Admittedly the defendant is
the tenant of the plaintiff in regard to
the plaint schedule premises, At the
time of letting out there was also an upstair
and the same was demolished by the
plaintiff. It was pleaded for the plaintiff
that it has become necessary to demolish
it as it is an old building and as it was
in dilapidated condition. While it was
pleaded for defendant that the monthly
rent was Rs.300/- for ground floor and
Rs. 255/- for the first floor it was stated
for the plaintiff that by the date of the
suit the monthly rent was Rs. 1600/-.
The version of the plaintiff was believed by
the lower court on the basis of Ex. A 10
reply dated 9-4-89 given by the defendant
through his counsel to the plaintiff.
(3.) The defendant revision petitioner
filed CMP 1540/91 praying for suspension
of the impugned order pending
disposal of the revision petition. Learned
brother Parvatha Rao J while hearing the CMP 1540/91
held that the case of plaintiff that the monthly rent was
Rs. 1600/- can be believed on the basil
of Ex. A 10 reply. But as the first floor
was demolished the learned brother
Parvatha Rao J ordered the defendant to
deposit at the rate of Rs. 250/- per
month from 1-3-89 to 31-3-91 and at
the same rate during the pendency
of the suit. Learned brother P L N
Sarma J by order dated 10-4-91 in
CMP 2628/91 the petition filed by the
plaintiff praying for vacating the order ia
CMP 1540/91 permitted the plaintiff to
withdraw the amounts already deposited
and to be deposited by the petitioner as
per tke order in CMP 1140/91 without
furnishing any security.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.