Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 787 (TS)

Syed Baquer Hussain v. Maninder Singh

2022-12-12

A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY

body2022
ORDER : This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/plaintiff assailing the dismissal of I.A.No.840 of 2022 in O.S.No.4868 of 2021 on the file of IX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2. This application in I.A.No.840 of 2022 is filed under Order XV-A read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code (for short ‘CPC’) to direct the respondents/defendants to deposit the arrears of rents @ Rs.15,000/- per month from May, 2021 onwards till disposal of the Original Suit. The trial Court, upon hearing both sides, dismissed the said application with an observation that as per Order XVA of CPC only the admitted arrears of rent can be directed to be paid by the defendants and there is a serious dispute with regard to the arrears of rent and that it can be adjudicated only at the time of trial and as such, the application filed by the plaintiff was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved by the order impugned dated 03.08.2021 in I.A.No.840 of 2021 this civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff. 3. Notice served on the respondents/defendants. But there is no representation. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff. The submissions made by him have received due consideration of this Court. 4. Point for consideration is : Whether the order impugned is sustainable or warrants interference by this Court? Point: 5. Be it stated that the plaintiff has filed Original Suit in O.S.No.4868 of 2021 against the defendants for eviction and recovery of peaceful possession in respect of suit schedule property and also for recovery of arrears of rents from May, 2021 onwards. 6. The defendants have filed written statement on 06.05.2022. On a plain reading of written statement, the jural relationship between the parties is not in dispute. However, it is contended in paragraph No.9 of the written statement that from November, 2021 onwards till the end of May, 2022 rents were not paid and that from May, 2021 till October, 2021 rents were paid by the defendants @ Rs.15,000/- per month. The defendants have not filed any piece of paper in proof of the fact that they have paid the rents from May, 2021 to October, 2021. 7. The defendants have not filed any piece of paper in proof of the fact that they have paid the rents from May, 2021 to October, 2021. 7. It is the specific case of the plaintiff that the rents were only paid till April, 2021 and thereafter since May, 2021 the defendants have failed to pay the rents and avoiding to answer the plaintiff’s calls. Thereupon, the plaintiff has got issued a notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act on 09.08.2021 terminating the tenancy w.e.f. August, 2021 and demanded vacant possession of the suit schedule property. Even in paragraph No.8 of the counter, filed in I.A.No.840 of 2021 the defendants have taken a plea that the rent is due from November, 2021 till May, 2022. Thus, admittedly the defendants have to pay the rents from November, 2021 till May, 2022 and thereafter they have also failed to pay the rents. But the defendants having pleaded that from May, 2021 to October, 2021 they have paid rents, failed to establish the same before the trial Court and they remained absent without any representation despite service of notice before this Court. 8. In a suit for recovery of possession and arrears of rent, mesne profits, considering the scheme of Order XVA of CPC and also admitted jural relationship of landlord and the tenant, the trial Court ought to have issued a direction to the respondents/defendants to pay the admitted arrears of rents and to continue to deposit the rent amount, which becomes payable during pendency of the proceedings. If the defendants commit default in making such payment/deposit, the trial Court shall also strike out the defence and plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the said amount. That being the legal position, the Court below failed to appreciate the facts of the case in conformity with the legislative intension under Order XV-A, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. 9. In M.B. Chander and others v. M/s. Balakrishna Rao Charitable Trust, Hyderabad, rep. That being the legal position, the Court below failed to appreciate the facts of the case in conformity with the legislative intension under Order XV-A, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. 9. In M.B. Chander and others v. M/s. Balakrishna Rao Charitable Trust, Hyderabad, rep. by its Managing Trustee, Sri M. Jayanth Tagore, 2016 (6) ALT 1 a learned Single Judge of this Court while dealing with the identical facts held that Order-XV A, Rule-2 of CPC empowers the Court to give such directions, otherwise it amounts to encouraging unscrupulous tenants, who intend to avoid payment of rent for the premises in their occupation for decades together, which would result in substantial loss to the landlord during pendency of the eviction suit or proceedings based on account of abortive pleas raised by the unscrupulous tenants. 10. In Bharath Bhushan Sanghi v. Manoj Kumar Soni, 2021 (5) ALD 353 (TS) a learned single Judge of this Court while considering the scheme of Order-XV A Rule-2 of CPC directed the tenant to clear arrears of rents within one month and to continue to deposit the rents. 11. Reverting back to the facts of the case on hand, as stated in the preceding paragraphs, the defendants have not denied the jursal relationship with the plaintiff as landlord and tenants. Admittedly the defendants are liable to pay the rents from November, 2021 onwards. The plaintiff has claimed that only up to April, 2021 the defendants have paid the rents and from May, 2021 onwards they are liable to pay the rents @ Rs.15,000/- per month, the quantum of rent is also admitted by the defendants in the counter as well as in the written statement, filed by them. The only dispute raised by the defendants is that they have paid the rents up to October, 2021, whereas, the plaintiff is claiming rent from May, 2021 onwards. But the defendants have not filed any proof to the effect that they have paid the admitted rents from May, 2021 to October, 2021. Having admitted the jural relationship and quantum of rent, the defendants have also failed to pay the admitted arrears also from November, 2021 to May, 2022. But the defendants have not filed any proof to the effect that they have paid the admitted rents from May, 2021 to October, 2021. Having admitted the jural relationship and quantum of rent, the defendants have also failed to pay the admitted arrears also from November, 2021 to May, 2022. Therefore, in view of the conduct of the defendants in not paying the admitted arrears of rents from November, 2021 onwards till date, necessary inference has to be drawn that the admitted quantum of rent is also not paid from May, 2021 onwards, as claimed by the plaintiff. In that view of the matter the trial Court erred in dismissing the application, filed by the plaintiff holding that there is a serious dispute with regard to the arrears of rent and there is no iota of evidence adduced or filed on behalf of the plaintiff and the same can be adjudicated only at the time of trial. Viewed from any angle, such a conclusion arrived at by the trial Court is against the admitted facts of the case and against the spirit and scheme of Order XV-A of CPC. Therefore, the order impugned warrants interference by this Court. 12. In the result, this civil revision petition is allowed, the order impugned dated 03.08.2022 in I.A.No.840 of 2022 in O.S.No.4868 of 2021 on the file of IX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad is hereby set aside, the respondents/defendants are hereby directed to clear the arrears of rents from May, 2021 onwards within a period of two months and shall continue to deposit the same till disposal of the Original Suit. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to the costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stands closed.