THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.805 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner ﬁled this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the order dated 22.12.2009 passed in I.A.No.3277 of 2009 in A.S.No.158 of 2009 on the ﬁle of the I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in allowing the petition ﬁled under Order XLI Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking stay of the judgment and decree dated 22.10.2009 passed in O.S.No.500 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, subject to deposit of suit costs of Rs.30,528/- by the respondents herein. Admittedly, O.S.No.500 of 2007 was ﬁled for declaration, possession and mesne proﬁts against the respondents on the ground that the petitioner herein purchased property from the previous owner B.Uma Maheswar Reddy under a sale deed dated 26.02.2007 and the respondents herein, who were tenants of the previous owner, falsely set up a rival claim. After full-ﬂedged trial, the suit was decreed with costs. After prolonged litigation, the respondents abandoned the premises and hence, the petitioner sought for a direction against the respondents to deposit minimum amount of Rs.500/- per month from the date of the suit till the date of disposal of the appeal and also sought for a direction to deposit the suit costs awarded by the trial Court. The lower appellate Court allowed the petition with a direction to the respondents herein to deposit suit costs of Rs.30,528/-. Aggrieved by the fact that the lower appellate Court did not direct the respondents herein to deposit a sum of Rs.500/- per month towards rent, the petitioner filed the present revision. There is no inﬁrmity in the order passed by the Court below in directing the respondents to deposit the suit costs of Rs.30,528/- while granting stay of the judgment and decree dated 22.10.2009 in O.S.No.500 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. The learned Judge has rightly exercised her discretion in granting stay on condition of payment of costs. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the order impugned. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. _____________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED, J) 25th November 2011 RRB