IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2874 OF 2011 Between : S.Shujauddin Ahmed ... PETITIONER A N D Smt S.Imtiazunnisa Begum …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 2874 OF 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order and decree, dated 15.06.2011, in I.A.No.542 of 2009 in O.S.No.235 of 2003 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order XV-A and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to direct the respondent herein to deposit rent of Rs.1500/- per month into the Court from 01.05.2008 till disposal of the suit, was dismissed on the ground that no application was moved when the suit was pending for the last six years. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff contended that the petitioner herein did not file an application to direct the occupier to deposit the rent for the reason that the respondent himself occupied the premises; that now the premises in-question was vacated by the respondent and he let out the same to third parties on rent and therefore, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. The petitioner filed the suit in the year 2003 for delivery of possession of plaint schedule property and for damages. The suit was filed in the year 2003. For the past six years, the petitioner has not taken any steps to file a petition to direct the respondent to deposit the rents into the Court. The reason given by the petitioner for filing the application now is that the respondent vacated the premises. Whether the respondent vacated the premises in question or not, or whether he is liable to pay rents or not, have to be decided in the suit. Since the suit is of the year 2003, the issues raised in this revision petition can be decided during the trial of the suit. At this belated stage no interim order can be passed with regard to payment of rents into the Court. The trial Court rightly dismissed the application. That order needs no interference by this Court, as there are no illegal or incorrect findings. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU. J AUGUST 23, 2011. YVL