MOHAMMED AYUB Vs. AYESHA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners in all these writ petitions being the defendants in a suit inter alia for a decree of partition & separate possession in O.S.No.25055/2018 are knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the common order dated 07.09.2020 a copy whereof is produced at Annexure-A whereby the learned LVII Additional City Civil Judge & Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, (CCH-58) having favoured respondent-plaintiffs' applications in IA No. 2 filed under Sec.151 of CPC, 1908 has directed the Defendant No.7 & 8 to deposit before the trial Court the future rents accruing from the subject property, until disposal of the suit.

(2.) The respondent-plaintiffs' being represented by their counsel, resist the writ petitions making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasoning on which it is structured.

(3.) Matter was heard at length and the petition papers are perused; learned Advocates appearing for both the sides are broadly and graciously in agreement with the view of this Court that the learned Judge of the Court below has not ascertained the rents accruing in respect of the property that had fallen to the share of late Mr. Mohammad Faruk who is none other than the deceased husband of the first plaintiff and father of the second plaintiff and therefore a wholesale direction for depositing the rents in respect of the entire property in question could not have been made, and consequently the impugned order having this apparent lacuna, makes it vulnerable for challenge.