Disposed

Pitta Radika v. Pujari Rajaiah

Telangana HC16 Feb 2024CRP/3312/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana set aside the trial court's order regarding the deposit of admitted rent in an eviction suit, conditioning relief on the petitioner depositing one-third of arrears within four weeks and the balance within six weeks, while directing continuation of monthly rent payments.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 07.08.2023 set aside on condition of depositing one-third arrears within four weeks and balance within six weeks.

Pitta Radika Vs Pujari Rajaiah — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FOR TI{E STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY,THE^{SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN}

¶6

c L vtsto NN 1 F 3

¶7

petition filed under kction 227 ol the constitution^{of lndia, aggrievedby} lfte Order dated^{07.O8.2O23pr."udin l'A'No'18 ot 2022in O'S'No'fiot 2022onlhe} f,d;i th.-C*,t^{of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge - cum - I AdditjonalJudicial} Magistrate of^{First Classat Hanumakonda'}

¶8

Between:

¶9

pitta Radika, w/o. Pitta Bharath Kumar aged about^{37 years occ.Proprietor} oi'fi/;13"il;;;'rlr'iiii*^{nr"*i"-ijriro. H.t't6's'141t1t8' Eleside A'R'R Garden} FU'ir; r;rsd^{;;' x. ij. C".a x, n-uma konda District}

¶10

...Petitioner/Defendant

¶11

-AND

¶12

. Puiari Raiaiah, W/o.^{Late Pujari Komurauah Hinduaged61.years og. ne|d} L;ffi ;dlil;.' ii.I.io.-^{6- r r -'rl z,} Foirrammarunb^Near -^{Hanuman remple} iiji;ffid; P'Jnimmasaaa^{k'U Roao HanumakondaDistrict}

¶13

(Cause Title Amended^{as per C.O',daled'24t11t2}23in l'A'No'2/2023)}

¶14

...ResPondenUPlaintiff

¶15

1.A NO:^{1 OF 2023}

¶16

Petition under^{Section '151 of CPC praying thatin the circumstances stated} in the affidavit^{filed in support of the petii'ron,the HighCourt mayUe Ole19{fo} stav of all further^{proceedingtin"f'Ji;g the impugned-orderdated in 7-8-2023in} iXffi: ft;i;ilii;^{o^sni. so* mLz on tn'e tite ot the I AdditionalJunior civil} ;;;;-;-;--inaoitionat^{J;icialMasistrateof first classat Harumakonda}

¶17

Counsel for the^{Petiti'oner :Sri G' Allabakash}

¶18

Counsel for the^{Respondent: Sri Chetluru Srinivas}

¶19

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶20

¶21

7-)

¶22

HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶23

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.33l2 OF 2023

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard Mr. G.Allabakash, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chetluru Srinivas, leamed counsel appearing for respondent.

¶26

The present Civil Revision^petition is filed challenging the order dated 07.08.2023 passed in I.A.No.18 of 2022 in O.S.No.56 of 2022 by the I Additional Junior Civil Judge - cum - I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Hanumakonda.

¶27

Respondent had filed a suit vide O.S.No.56 of 2022 against the petitioner seeking for eviction, damages and mesne profits etc. In the said suit, respondent/plaintiff had filed an application vide I.A.No.18 of 2022 under Order l5-A read with Section 15l of Cr.p.C. seeking a direction to the petitioner herein/defendant to deposit admitted rent of Rs.16,500/- per month from May, 2021 till disposal of the suit, failing which pass order in accordance with the procedure contemplated under Order l5-A of CPC.

¶28

According to the respondenVplaintiff, he is orvner ofthe suit schedule property and the petitioner herein/defendant is a tenant. There is specific mention about the rental agreement dated 19.l 1.2018

¶29

¶30

and also another agreement^{dated18.01.2021.On expiry of the said} lease period, they^{have enteredintofresh agreementdated 18'01'2021} herein it was^{agreedthat the rent is Rs.16,500/-per month'Therefore,} the petitioner^{herein/defendant being the tenant has to depositthe said} amount.

¶31

The petitioner^{herein has filed counteropposingthe said} application contending^{thatshe haspaid the agreed amount'Having} received the same,^{respondent/plaintiff did not issueany receipt'Vide} impugned order^{dated O7.O8.2O23,leamedtrial Court allowed the said} application and^{directed the petitioner herein/defendantto deposiVpay} the arrears of^{rent of Rs.16,500/-per monthfrom May, 2021 till the} date of order^{within 90 days from the date of the impugnedorder' The} petitioner herein shall^{continue to deposit the amountwhich becomes} payable thereafter^{i.e. Rs.16,500/-per monthon or before lOh of} every month. In^{default,the Court shall strike off the defence'} Challenging^{the said order, the petitioner herein has filed the presert} revls10n.

¶32

In the counter^{itself,the petitioner herein has admitted that} respondent/plaintiff^{is the ownerof the subject property and theyhave} entered into^{lease agreement dated l9.ll-2018and on expiry of the}

¶33

¶34

¶35

same, they have entered into fresh agreement on 18.01.2021. They have also admiued that the lease amount of Rs.16.500/- per month. However, she has stated that she has filed a suit vide O.S.No.l115 of 2021 against the respondent herein for perpetual injunction and the same was decreed. It is an ex parte decree. Respondent has aheady filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree.

¶36

The aforesaid facts would reveal that the admitted rent is Rs.16,500/- per month. The petitioner herein/defendant being tenant has to pay the said amount. On consideration of the entire facts including the contentions of the petitioner herein/defendant in the counter, leamed kial Court vide impugned order dated 07.08.2023 in I.A.No.l8 of 2022 rightly held that the petitioner herein being tenant to pay the said admitted rent from May,2021. There is no error in the said order.

¶37

At this stage, leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein will deposit l/3'd of the arrears within four weeks from today and he sought some reasonable time to deposit the balance amount.

¶38

In the light of the aforesaid discussion and submission, this revision is disposed of. Order dated 07.08.2023^{passed in I.A.No.18 of}

,f,l

2022 in O.S.No.56 of 2022 by the I Additional Junior Civil Judge - cum - I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at

¶43

Hanumakonda is hereby set aside on a condition of the petitioner depositing 1/3'd arrears within four weeks from today and balance arears within six weeks thereafter to the credit of the aforesaid suit, The petitioner shall continue to^pay the said amount of Rs.16,500/-

¶44

regularly, failing which the impugned order dated 07.08.2023 will^be

¶45

in operation and trial Court shall take steps in according^withlaw.

¶46

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the

¶47

revision shall stand closed.

¶48

SD/-G.SIREESHA AssrsrANr^REGdIRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶49

SECTION OFFICER

¶50

To,

¶51

ThelAdditionalJuniorCivilJudge-cum-lAdditionalJudicialMagistrateof First Class^{at Hanumakonda.} 2 ij;; cd6 Sii'c. Attaoarr"h,^{Advocate toPqgl-.} .^. 3 on; cc io sri cneturu^{Sreenivas,Advocate [oPUc]}

¶52

Two^{CD CoPies} I

Nj b

, ,

HIGH COURT

KL,J

DATED:f 6lO2l2O24

ORDER

CRP.No.3312 of 2023

$E ST^I
or) [5 I I
:'

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE CRP

¶62

Arr

Pitta Radika v. Pujari Rajaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pitta Radika v. Pujari Rajaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Challa Umadevi Vs Pinninti Prakash Rao

Kandala Prabhakar Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

Chitti Reddy Mahender Reddy Vs Smt. P.Shirisha

Seelam Ramesh Vs Velpula Bikshapathi

Malreddy Ranga Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Siri Consultants Vs M/s. Ritvis Labs Pvt. Ltd.