IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. NO :3826 of 2009 Between: Smt. Zaheda Talath ..... PETITIONER AND Mohammadi Begum .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:3826 OF 2009 ORDER: Aggrieved by the order passed in R.A.No.66 of 2009 on 6.08.2009 by the learned Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad confirming the order of the learned I Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad passed in I.A.No.130 of 2009 in I.A.No.41 of 2009 in R.C.No:33 of 2009 on 23.4.2009, the present civil revision petition has been preferred. The revision petitioner is the tenant and the respondent is the landlady. Originally, the landlady filed an application in I.A.No.41 of 2009 seeking to issue a direction to the tenant to deposit the arrears of rent of Rs.27,000/- from October, 2006 till January, 2009 for 27 months at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month and continue to deposit the future rent, till disposal of the main RC. The Court below allowed the said application directing the tenant to deposit the rent from July, 2008 at the rate of Rs.1,000/- p.m., till March, 2009 and continue to deposit future rents viz., from April, 2009 regularly at the rate of Rs.1,000/- p.m. As the tenant failed to comply with that order, the landlady filed I.A.No.130 of 2009 seeking eviction of the tenant. The Court below allowed the said application and directed the tenant to put the landlord in vacant possession of the premises within one month. Hence, the tenant carried the matter in appeal and lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal by confirming the order of the Rent Controller. Having aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition is filed by the petitioner-tenant. When this matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner-tenant filed an affidavit, under which, the petitioner- tenant while giving an undertaking to vacate the schedule premises, seeks time till 31st March, 2010. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the observations made by the Courts below and in view of the undertaking given by the petitioner-tenant, I feel it appropriate to grant time up to 31st March, 2010 to the petitioner-tenant to vacate the schedule premises. It is made clear that till such time, the petitioner-tenant shall pay rents regularly. Subject to the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari Date: 9.10.2009 Nn. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:3826 OF 2009 09.10.2009