HOLLYWOOD RESTAURANT Vs. V A SESHRAJ

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.