THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3609 OF 2011 ORDER: This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order, dated 16-06-2011 in I.A.No.323 of 2011 in O.A.No.85 of 2011 on the file of the A.P. State Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The respondents herein (applicants) filed the above application under Section 83 (6) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institution and Endowments Act, 1987 to direct the petitioner herein to pay Rs.5,000/- towards damages for use and occupation charges for using the premises bearing D.No.8-2-86/2. The Tribunal allowed the application in part directing the petitioner herein to pay Rs.2,000/- per month for use and occupation of the premises in question from 1st February, 2011 till the disposal of the main O.A. and also arrears within one month from the date of that order, failing which, it is left open to the respondents herein to move the Tribunal for striking out the defence of the petitioner herein in the main O.A. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein contended that no damages can be granted at interlocutory stage, that for a small premises, granting of Rs.2,000/- per month for use and occupation is on higher side, that as per oral lease, even if 40% is enhanced, it would be around Rs.1,000/- or so and therefore, granting of Rs.2,000/- per month for use and occupation of the premises in question is excessive. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents herein contended that considering the location and extent of the building, the Tribunal rightly granted Rs.2,000/- per month for use and occupation of the premises in question and if the premises in question is leased out to third parties by conducting auction, it would fetch not less than Rs.5,000/- per month, that even ordering for Rs.2,000/- for use and occupation of the premises in question is very meager and hence, he prays to dismiss the revision. 5. It is not in dispute that lease period was expired on 31- 12-2004. Lease amount as on that date was Rs.230/- per month. There is no lease subsisting after 31-12-2004. To safeguard the interest of both parties, a reasonable rent towards damages for use and occupation can be determined during the pendency of original application. When the Tribunal has got power to adjudicate the rents towards damages for use and occupation, it has got power to make interim arrangement. Even the interim arrangement of fixing a rent towards damages for use and occupation is found to be excessive, the same can be adjusted for future rent and if it is found to be reasonable at the time of disposal, no hardship would be caused to the applicants. 6. The petitioner cannot squat over the property as he likes for years together. After lease period is over, in pursuance of oral lease, the petitioner herein is continuing in the premises in question. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, the oral lease was also over and therefore, the petitioner has no right to remain in the property as he said to be a trespasser. But that question has to be decided in the main O.A. However, the fact remains the premises in question is located in a strategic locality very near to the Railway Station and if the premises in question is auctioned, it would get more rent. Therefore, considering the locality and rent payable in pursuance of oral agreement long prior to the passing of the order, fixing of Rs.2,000/- per month cannot be said to be on higher side. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, two months time is granted to the petitioner herein for payment of arrears, if any. No order as to costs. ---------------------- K.C.BHANU, J. DATED: 29-08-2011 Hsd