THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPAHY C.R.P.No.6156 OF 2010 ORDER This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 15-12-2010 in I.A.No.943 of 2010 in O.S.No.134 of 2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, wherein the said application filed by the respondent-plaintiff seeking a direction to the defendant to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month into the Court till the disposal of the suit, was allowed. The respondent herein filed the suit for specific performance of suit agreement of sale dated 2-3-2009 and also an alternative relief of refund of Rs.9,80,000/-. According to the respondent-plaintiff, the petitioner- defendant got the suit schedule property through gift deed executed by her mother on 5-6-2008; that she agreed to sell the same to the respondent-plaintiff for Rs.9,90,000/- and executed an agreement of sale on 2-3-2009; that the plaintiff has paid Rs.9,80,000/- towards the sale consideration and only Rs.10,000/- remains to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. The defendant filed written statement denying the execution of the suit agreement of sale. It is not disputed that the plaintiff is father-in-law of the defendant. The truth or otherwise of the suit agreement of sale is a matter to be considered by the trial Court on evidence that may be adduced during the course of the trial. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.845 of 2010 for termporary injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the plaint schedule property pending disposal of the suit. An ad-interim injunction was granted in I.A.No.845 of 2010. The plantiff’s interest in the suit property is thus duly safeguarded by the interim order passed in I.A.No.845 of 2010. However, the plaintiff filed the present application I.A.No.943 of 2010 seeking a direction to the defendant to deposit Rs.5,000/- per month into Court. Learned Senior Civil Judge allowed the said application on the ground that the defendant has not filed any counter in I.A No.845 of 2010. The impugned order does not disclose any valid or sufficient ground for issuing a direction to the defendant to deposit Rs.5,000/- per month into the Court. If the defendant fails to file counter in I.A.No.845 of 2010 in spite of granting several adjournments, the trial Court can pass appropriate orders on the said application. The failure of the defendant to file a counter in I.A.No.845 of 2010 does not afford a valid ground for giving a direction to the defendant to deposit Rs.5,000/- per month into the Court. In the event of the plaintiff succeeding in the suit, it is always open to him to seek an appropriate remedy regarding the mesne profits, as according to him, he has already parted with almost entire sale consideration in a sum of Rs.9,80,000/-. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order directing the defendant to deposit Rs.5,000/- per month into the Court pending disposal of the suit, is held unsustainable and is accordingly set aside. The trial Court is directed to make an endeavour for early disposal of the suit. Civil revision petition is allowed accordingly. No costs. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPAHY,J rkk Dated: 29-08-2011