THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5761 OF 2010 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the order dated 27.08.2010 in I.A.No.777 of 2010 in O.S.No.407 of 2009 on the file of the 12th Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad wherein the said application filed by the respondents/plaintiffs under Order 15-A r/w section 151 of CPC seeking a direction to the petitioners who are the defendants in the suit to pay a sum of Rs.26,41,648/- being arrears of rents, maintenance charges, municipal taxes etc, was allowed directing the petitioners to deposit the said amount within 30 days and with a further direction to the petitioners to deposit rents at Rs.1,75,800/- p.m. from 01.04.2010 till August 2010 and maintenance charges and municipal taxes from 01.07.2009 till the date and continue to deposit the rents and maintenance charges from September 2010 on or before 10th of every succeeding month till disposal of the suit. 2 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondents. Perused the record. 3 The respondents herein filed the suit for eviction of the petitioners / defendants from the suit schedule property and for recovery of arrears of rent and other reliefs. The petitioners / defendants filed written statement denying that they ever entered into any lease agreement agreeing to pay rent at the rate of Rs.1,75,800/- p.m. According to the defendants as per the original lease deed the rent was to be increased at 5% p.a. and the lease deed pressed into service by the plaintiffs is a fabricated one. The defendants are disputing their liability to pay any arrears of rent in a sum of Rs.12,95,800/- a claimed by the plaintiffs up to 30.06.2009. According to the defendants they were paying the rents as originally agreed upon under the original lease deed and the plaintiffs have received the cheques issued by the defendants. The defendants also disputed the plaintiffs’ claim that the rent was enhanced from 34,170/- to Rs.1,75,800/- p.m. The subject matter of the lease premises is stated to be situated in the premises bearing MCH No.8-2-596/5/B/1/A admeasuring 1758 sq.ft. situate in road No.10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. The original lease deed was entered into on 01.12.2003 for a period of three years. After expiry of the initial period, the lease was extended, according to the plaintiffs, by executing a registered lease deed dated 29.03.2008 for a period of 18 months and it was terminated on 31.05.2009. The plaintiffs further pleaded that the rent agreed under the original lease deed was Rs.41,442/- p.m. from 01.12.2007 to 30.11.2008 and Rs.100/- per sft from 01.012.2008. It is further pleaded by the plaintiffs that the defendants are liable to pay municipal taxes and maintenance charges. The plaintiffs allege that as the defendants committed default in payment of rents from 01.12.2008, the lease was terminated by issuing a notice dated 23.03.2009 demanding the defendants to vacate and deliver vacant possession on 01.07.2009. The petitioners / defendants dispute the genuineness of the renewal lease deed and contend that the same is fabricated and the plaintiffs have played fraud. The truth or otherwise of the said contention has to necessarily be adjudicated upon by the trial court on the evidence that is to be adduced by the parties during the course of trial. 4 The trial court by the impugned order directed the payment of the arrears of rent as claimed by the plaintiffs in pursuance of the lease deed, the genuineness of which is disputed by the defendants. According to the defendants there are no arrears as claimed by the plaintiffs in view of non existence of any enhancement of rent as claimed by the plaintiffs and the original rents are already paid by the defendants. The trial court directed payment of the arrears of rent from 01.12.2008 along with arrears of maintenance charges and municipal taxes as claimed in the petition observing that it is a fit case for such a direction irrespective of the contentions raised by the defendants. Order 15 A CPC states as follows: (1) In a suit for recovery of possession, on termination of lease, or licence, with or without a prayer for recovery of arrears of rent, or licence fee, known with whatever description, the defendant, while filing his written statement, shall deposit the amount, representing the undisputed arrears, calculated upto that due into the Court and shall continue to deposit suit amount, which becomes payable thereafter within one week from the date on which it becomes due, till the judgment is rendered in the suit. (2) Whether the defendant pleads in the written statement that no arrears of rent or licence fee exists, it shall be competent for the court to pass an order in this regard, after affording opportunity to both the parties, and in case any amount is found due, the defendant shall be under obligation to deposit the same, within the time stipulated by the Court and continue to deposit the amount which becomes payable thereafter, as provided under Rule1. Provided that the time stipulated for payment of amount, as aforesaid, may be extended by the Court for reasons to be recorded for a period not exceeding 15 days. If the defendant commits default in making the deposits, as aforesaid, the Court shall strike off the defence. On such deposit it shall be competent for the plaintiff to withdraw the same. 5 A plain reading of the above provision would disclose that in a suit for recovery of possession, the defendant while filing his written statement shall deposit the amount representing the undisputed arrears calculated up to that date into the court and shall continue to deposit such amount which becomes payable thereafter till the judgment is rendered in the suit. When the defendant pleads in the written statement that no arrears of rent exist, the court can pass an order after giving opportunity to both sides directing the defendant to deposit the amount found due within the time stipulated by the court. If the defendant commits default in making the deposit as directed, the court shall strike off the defence. It is, therefore, manifestly clear from the above provision that what is required to be ascertained and to be deposited by the defendant while filing the written statement in the suit for recovery of possession is undisputed arrears. It follows that when a dispute regarding the quantum of arrears as claimed by the plaintiff and when the claim made by the plaintiff regarding the arrears of rent is disputed by the defendants, necessarily, adjudication has to take place regarding the amount of arrears actually due and payable by the defendant. Such a claim made by the plaintiff which is disputed by the defendants cannot be considered to be undisputed arrears, which alone can be directed to be paid under Order 15 A CPC. 6 In the present case, the claim made by the plaintiffs in their application claiming arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.1,75,800/- p.m. for 16 months in a sum of Rs.28,12,800/- is categorically denied and disputed by the defendants. However, the trial court without making any adjudication upon the said dispute chose to direct the defendants to deposit the said amount together with the arrears of maintenance charges and municipal taxes under Order 15 A CPC as if the said amount represents undisputed arrears. 7 The impugned order is, therefore, unsustainable and the same is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration and to ascertain the actual amount due and payable by the defendants towards undisputed arrears of rent besides the maintenance charges and municipal taxes and pass appropriate orders in the matter in accordance with law after giving opportunity to both parties. 8 The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------- G.V. SEETHAPTHY, J. 08.06.2011 Kvsn