Mr. Shaik Waseem vs Khaja Nayeemuddin Ahmed
2023 Latest Caselaw 4085 Tel

          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

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

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.

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.

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