1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6168 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.6169 OF 2009 1 Smt.Shalini Shankar Ingale 2 Ramdas Shankar Inagale 3 Prabhakar Shankar Inagale 4 Jagannath Shankar Inagale ...Petitioners (in both the petitions) vs. Mohammed Rasik Ali ...Respondent (in both the petitions) Mr.K.P.Mali for the petitioners Mr.P.R.Kadam for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : FEBRUARY 17, 2010 P.C. 1 These Writ Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are filed by the original plaintiffs. The petitioners filed two separate suits against the respondent under section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act,1882. In the said suits, applications were made by the petitioners invoking Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code). In the suits filed in the year 2008, prayers were made for seeking a direction against the respondent to deposit arrears of compensation from June 1992 onwards. The applications were allowed by the learned trial Judge. Revision applications were preferred by the respondent before the Appeal Bench of the Court of Small Causes. The revision Applications were partly allowed and the orders passed by the trial Court were modified to the extent that the compensation was made payable from the date of institution of the 2 suits. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the Order XV-A of the said Code. He submitted that the power conferred on the Court to direct the deposit the compensation is not limited to passing order of deposit from the date of institution of the suit. The power is conferred of directing the defendant to deposit the entire arrears of compensation. He invited my attention to the observations made by the Appeal Bench and submitted that a clear error of law has been committed as the Appeal Bench was under an impression that under Order XV-A of the said Code, arrears prior to the date of institution of the suit cannot be ordered to be deposited. 3 I have considered the submissions. The learned counsel for the petitioners is right to the extent that in a given case, while exercising power under Order XVA of the said Code, the Court can direct the deposit of arrears of compensation from a date prior to the date of institution of the suit. 4 However, non compliance with the order passed under sub-rule 1 of Order XV-A of the said Code has a drastic consequence. The defence of the defendant may be struck out. On plain reading of sub-rule 1 of Order XV-A of the said Code, there is a discretion vested in the Court to decide the amount which should be deposited by the defendant. 5 In the present case in the suits were filed in the year 2006. The order of deposit was sought from 1992. The Appellate Court has exercised discretion by directing the deposit of the amount of arrears of compensation from 3 the dates of institution of the respective suits. It is not possible to find fault with the discretionary order. 6 The learned counsel for the petitioners made a grievance that the respondent has not deposited the amount even as per the order passed in Revision Applications. If that is so, remedy of applying for striking out the defence is always available to the petitioners. No case for interference is made out. Writ Petitions are rejected. JUDGE