- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The appellant, claiming to be the owner in possession, filed a suit against respondents for permanent injunction alleging that she and her husband were carrying on business in the said property from 1998 and the respondents were interfering with such possession. In the said suit, which was filed in July 2005, the defendants (respondents herein) filed an application in 2007 seeking a direction to the appellant (plaintiff in the suit) to deposit arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month from 1.6.2005. By a non-speaking order dated 9.10.2007, the trial court allowed the said application and the revision filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the High Court by impugned order dated 19.3.2010. The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
(3.) The appellant contends that she is in possession in her own right. She filed a mere suit for injunction. The respondents claim that appellant is their tenant. If the appellant as tenant had failed to pay rent, it is open to the respondents as landlords/owners to seek possession/eviction or seek a decree for rental arrears. In a suit for permanent injunction filed by the appellant, when the question of title and relationship of landlord and tenant is not in issue, the respondents - defendants cannot claim that the appellant - plaintiff should deposit Rs.5,000/- per month towards rent.;