WP.1868-11 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1868 OF 2011 Mrs. V. Baby Saroja ...Petitioner Vs. Mr. Henry Paul Cardoza ...Respondent *** Mr. S. C. More, for the Petitioner. Mr. Nitin G. Raut, for Respondent. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : MARCH 15, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner is the original defendant. He is aggrieved by an order passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court dated 21-12-2010. By the said order, the learned Single Judge, Small Causes Court was pleased to allow the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff. The respondent/plaintiff had filed an application, permitting him to withdraw the amount deposited by the defendant in the Court as compensation in respect of the suit premises. WP.1868-11 - 2 - 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a preliminary objection was raised by the petitioner regarding maintainability of the suit. It is submitted that since the premises are situated in an area which has been declared as a ‘Slum’, the Small Causes Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the suit. It is submitted that the trial Court, however, has directed that the said application should be decided along with the main suit. He submitted that the petitioner has been depositing the amount in the Court and therefore, the interest of the respondent is secured. It is submitted that if the petitioner succeeds in the said suit, he would not be in a position to recover the said amount, if withdrawn. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that while allowing his application, the Small Causes Court has imposed a condition that he should give an undertaking to the Court that he would return the said amount, if paid by the petitioner towards the compensation. 4. I have perused the impugned order. In my view, no case is made out for interfering with the impugned order passed by the trial Court. In my view, apart from giving an undertaking to the trial Court of re-depositing the entire amount which is withdrawn in lump-sum, the WP.1868-11 - 3 - respondent shall furnish adequate solvent security to the satisfaction of the Registrar of the Small Causes Court. With this modification, writ petition is disposed of. Hearing of the suit is expedited. [ V. M. KANADE J.]