THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2450 of 2023
ORDER:
The present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 14.08.2023 passed in I.A.No.421 of 2023 in A.S.No.40 of 2023 by the learned IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.
2. Heard Aadesh Varma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. Mohan, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. Vide the said impugned order, the Court below has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/appellant under Order XLI Rule 5 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking for suspension of judgment and decree dated 29.11.2022 passed in O.S.No.1241 of 2017 by the learned II Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
4. Initially, the Original Suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff before the learned II Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, vide O.S.No.1241 of the 2017 praying the Court to direct the petitioner/defendant to vacate the peaceful possession of suit schedule property and to pay arrears of rent of Rs.1,50,000/- for the period from February, 2016 to April, 2017 and for subsequent months at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month and to award mesme profits for the illegal use and occupation of the suit schedule property after the 2 termination of lease by the respondent/plaintiff. The respondent/plaintiff claimed themselves to be the owner of the suit schedule property and the petitioner herein was a tenant in the said premises. The respondent/plaintiff purchased the suit schedule property from its original owner namely Ms. Azmath Sultana in the year 2000. The suit was filed on the basis of an agreement of sale which stood decided in favour of the respondent executed by the original land owner who had vested the property by virtue of the agreement of sale in the custody of the present respondent/plaintiff.
5. During the course of the deliberations what has been culled out from the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties is that, the petitioner who is the tenant in the said subject property has not paid rent for almost two (2) decades on the alleged ground of some arrangement made between the tenant and the original land lady. The land lady herself has been examined before the Court below as PW.2 in support of the respondent/plaintiff. What is further reflected is that O.S.No.1241 of 2017 stood decided in favour of the respondent/plaintiff on 29.11.2022 and the said judgment is under challenge in O.S.No.40 of 2023 on the file of the learned IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad. It was in this appeal that the I.A.No.421 of 2023 was filed seeking for suspension of the same.
6. The Court below has taken into consideration the fact that since the petitioner has not paid the rent for a considerable period of time 3 and he has not shown his bonafide seeking for suspension of judgment and decree, it was in this context that the said application has been rejected.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that rather than dismissing the said I.A. seeking for suspension of judgment and decree on the ground of default on the part of the petitioner, the Court below ought to have ordered for depositing of at least some amount so that the petitioner could have considered depositing the same and pursue his legal right of appeal.
8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that there was an agreement of sale in favour of the respondent/plaintiff on the basis of which the property was also handed over by the original land owner to the respondent/plaintiff. The petitioner/tenant did not either pay the rent, nor was he vacating the premises which led to his filing of the Suit in the year 2017. He further submits that a considerable long period which runs into many years, for more than a decade the petitioner/tenant has not paid the rent and is occupying the said premises free of cost and it was this aspect also which was taken note of by the Court below while rejecting the I.A.No.421 of 2023 seeking for suspension of the judgment and decree.
4
9. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of records, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that since admittedly the appeal of the petitioner is pending consideration before the Court below and admittedly the petitioner/tenant has not paid rent either to the original land lady or to the present petitioner for decades now. In the given factual circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the present Civil Revision Petition is allowed subject to the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- within a period of seven (7) days from today, the effect and operation of the judgment and decree would remain suspended till the appeal is decided by the learned IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.
10. Considering the fact that the appeal is also pending since January, 2023, i.e., for almost eleven (11) months now, the learned IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, is directed to take up the appeal on priority basis and decide the same on its own merits in accordance with law. It is further directed that the amount so deposited by the petitioner would not be permitted to be released till the appeal is finally decided.
5
11. With the above observations, the present Civil Revision Petition stands allowed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J Date: 17.11.2023 GSD