THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4729 OF 2010 Date: 19-11-2010 Between Chalasani Kalyani Leela …..Petitioner And Kolli Venkat Rao …..Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4729 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner – plaintiff who filed suit O.S No. 195 of 2009 for eviction of the defendant from the plaint schedule property filed I.A No. 1007 of 2009 for recovery of arrears of rent apart from damages and to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month towards damages for use and occupation. The respondent – defendant filed a counter contesting the claim and stating that the rent is only Rs.3,000/- per month which he used to pay to the original owners of the plaint schedule property and when the vendors of the petitioner wanted to evict him, he filed O.S No. 441 of 2008 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Gudivada and since the original owners stopped receiving rents, he deposited the rents in a separate account and the present application is filed only to harass him. The respondent also filed I.A No. 1442 of 2009 seeking permission to deposit the agreed rent of Rs.3,000/- per month without prejudice to his rights and contentions in the suit to which the petitioner filed a counter stating that her vendor at the time of sale informed her that the rent is Rs.10,000/- per month and if he is permitted to deposit Rs.3,000/- per month, there will not be any security for the balance of Rs.9,000/- and, therefore, the Court may direct the respondent to pay Rs.3,000/- per month directly to him and to deposit the balance of Rs.9,000/- to the credit of the suit. The lower Court by the impugned order closed the I.A ordering the respondent to deposit Rs.39,000/- towards rent for the months from June 2009 to June 2010 on or before 07-07-2010 and to continue to deposit Rs.3,000/- per month from July 2010 onwards. Questioning the same, the present revision is filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Court below ought to have allowed the petition and that the petitioner will withdraw only Rs.3,000/- out of the deposit of Rs.12,000/- and the balance will be kept to the credit of the suit and only in the event of his succeeding in the suit for eviction and damages, it can be adjusted as per the judgment and decree to be passed in the suit. The respondent filed O.S No. 441 of 2008 against the vendors of the plaintiff seeking injunction claiming that he is the tenant of the plaint schedule property on a monthly rent of Rs.3,000/- as per Ex.B-1, whereas according to the plaintiff the agreed rent is Rs.10,000/- per month and that the respondent is due of that rent since August, 2009. In the suit, the petitioner claimed Rs.20,000/- as arrears of rent for June and July, 2009 and thereafter at the rate of Rs.12,000/- per month towards damages for use and occupation. Since the respondent has deposited undisputed arrears of rent as per Order XV-A CPC, unless the petitioner establishes that the admitted rent is Rs.10,000/- and the same has been recited by his vendors in the sale deed or by any cogent evidence, on mere oral assertion of the vendor of the petitioner, amount as prayed for by the petitioner cannot be ordered to be deposited to the credit of the suit. In view of the same, no infirmity is discernible in the order passed by the Court below. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. A. GOPAL REDDY, J 19-11-2010 ks