1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.153 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1248 OF 2011 (D) Shri Rajeev s/o Ramesh Chhabra, Aged – Major, Occupation - Business, having office at 6, Avatar Mehar Baba Society, Near Bhole Petrol Pump, Dharampeth, Nagpur. .. Appellant .. Versus .. Shri Mahendra s/o Laxminarayan Joshi, Aged – Major, R/o. Flat No.6, Avatar Mehar Baba Society, Near Bhole Petrol Pump, Dharampeth, Nagpur. .. Respondent .......... Mr. M.Y. Wadodkar, Advocate for the appellant, Mr. K.V. Thomas, Advocate h/f Mr. Masood Shareef, Advocate for the respondent. .......... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE AND M.N. GILANI, JJ. Date of reserving order : 20.8.2011 Date of pronouncing order : 23.8.2011. P.C. 1. The appellant-original defendant in RCS No.225/2010 pending before the Judge, Small Causes Court, Nagpur has filed 2 this appeal taking an exception to the order dated 14.3.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.1248/2011 by the learned Single Judge. 2. The appellant was inducted in the suit premises on 3.1.2008 on monthly rent of Rs.10,000/-. During pendency of the suit filed by the respondent-original plaintiff, the application under Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure was moved seeking direction against the appellant to deposit arrears of rent. The learned trial Judge, after hearing the parties, directed that the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- being arrears of the rent till October, 2010. The appellant was expected to deposit this amount within a month and was further directed to pay the rent regularly for the period from November 2010 onwards. This order was questioned before the learned Single Judge. 3. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, did not find any fault with the order of the learned trial Judge and refused to interfere with the order impugned in the petition. 4. Mr. Wadodkar, learned counsel for the appellant, mainly invited our attention to the copies of the pay orders at page nos.71 to 77 to point out that the monthly rent at the rate of Rs.10,000/- was being regularly paid from December 2009 to 3 August 2010 and that being so finding recorded by the trial Court is inconsistent with the evidence placed on the record. 5. The learned trial Judge, by his well reasoned order, dealt with this aspect of the matter. Admittedly, the period of occupation till the month of October 2010 comes to 36 months. Till this date, the appellant has made payment of Rs.2,20,000/-. As such, till October 2010, the amount of arrears of rent comes to Rs.1,20,000/-. Whatever payments have been made by pay orders right from 10.12.2009 to 3.8.2010 have been taken into consideration. 6. In that light of the matter, the appeal lacks merit. The appeal is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande