dgm gm gm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.6880 OF 2008 PETITION NO.6880 OF 2008 PETITION NO.6880 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.R.A.Thorat i/b.Mr.Sanjeev R. Singh for the Petitioners. Mr.A.S.Joshi i/b.Mr.S.S.Joshi for the respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 18th October, 2008. : 18th October, 2008. : 18th October, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. The petitioner has challenged the conditional order of directing to deposit the monthly compensation/damages at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of decree i.e. August 2006 on or before 10.10.2008 and further shall deposit the same regularly on or before 10th of every month. Admittedly the petitioner/tenant is in occupation of premises admeasuring about 9000 sq.ft. Considering the judgment in Pradeep Kumar v. Hajari Pradeep Kumar v. Hajari Pradeep Kumar v. Hajari ( 2 ) Lal, Lal, Lal, A.I.R. 2008 S.C.1689 A.I.R. 2008 S.C.1689 A.I.R. 2008 S.C.1689 and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I see there is no reason to interfere with the same on a submission that the agreed rent was only Rs.125/- p.m. The reasoning given based upon the decision so referred, there is no perversity which needs interference. There is no challenge by the landlord. The petition is accordingly dismissed. However, time to deposit the amount is extended for a period of three weeks from today. [ ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.] ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.] ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.]