IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST (21st) DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.Nos.866 & 1059 OF 2011 Between:
M/s J.R.S.Sofa World Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Dr.M.G.Jeelani, Makalpet, Hyderabad and another And:
M/s Reliance Modern Constructions, … Appellant Rep. by its Partner Sri K.Jaya Vamshi Ganesh, Punjagutta, Hyderabad.
… Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.Nos.866 & 1059 OF 2011 COMMON ORDER:
C.R.P.No.866 of 2011 is directed against the common order dated 31.01.2011 in I.A.No.1197 of 2009 in O.S.No.No.308 of 2009, on the file of the V-Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District, wherein the said application filed by the respondent herein, the plaintiff, under Section 151 CPC, seeking a direction to the petitioners herein to deposit the arrears of rent from 01.02.2009 to 30.04.2009 in a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- with a further direction to deposit future rents at Rs.1,50,000/- per month as per the lease deed dated 01.11.2008, was allowed.
2. C.R.P.No.1059 of 2011 is filed against the very same common order dated 31.01.2011 in I.A.No.16 of 2011 in O.S.No.308 of 2009, wherein the said application filed by the petitioners herein, the defendants, under Section 151 CPC seeking permission to deposit Rs.3,81,150/- from out of Rs.4,50,000/- as claimed in I.A.No.1197 of 2009 and seeking further permission to deposit every month the rent for two months i.e., current month and one month’s arrears after deducting TDS, was disposed of with a direction to deposit the balance arrears of rent from May, 2009 till January, 2011 within 30 days and continue to deposit the future rents from February, 2011 at Rs.1,50,000/- per month, till the disposal of the suit, within one week of every succeeding month after deducting the income tax.
3. Heard both sides. Perused the record.
4. The respondent herein filed the suit against the petitioners for eviction from the schedule premises and for recovery of arrears of rent in a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from December, 2008 to April, 2009 at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per month and also for damages at the rate of Rs.2 lakhs per month from the date of suit till the date of eviction. According to the plaintiff, they are the absolute owners of the schedule property comprising a constructed area of 2500 sq. ft and the same was leased out to the defendants under the registered lease deed dated 30.10.2008 for a period of five years w.e.f 01.12.2008 and the agreed rent was Rs.1,50,000/- per month, excluding water and electricity charges. The plaintiff further pleaded that possession of the property was delivered to the defendants on 01.11.2008, but the payment of rent shall commence from 01.12.2008. The plaintiff alleges that at the time of registration of the lease deed, the defendants have made certain interpolations altering the agreed terms of lease without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff and the plaintiff came to know of the same after they obtained certified copies subsequently and they lodged a complaint with the District Registrar alleging fraud. The plaintiff also alleges that the defendants got issued a notice in February, 2009 making certain false allegations regarding the amenities, for which the plaintiff got issued a reply notice dated 02.03.2009 demanding the defendants to vacate the premises and to pay the arrears of rent, for which the defendants got issued a reply notice dated 25.03.2009.
5. The defendants filed a written statement contesting the suit. While the matters stood thus, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1197 of 2009 seeking a direction to the defendants to deposit the arrears of rent in a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- and also a direction to the defendants to deposit future rents at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per month.
6. It is not disputed that the defendants have taken the schedule premises on lease from the plaintiff under the registered lease deed dated 30.10.2008 and the agreed rent is Rs.1,50,000/- per month. Admittedly, as per the terms of the lease deed, the rent is payable from 01.12.2008. The defendants claim that they opened the showroom only on 10.10.2009, but admittedly the premises was delivered to the defendants in advance to enable them to make necessary alterations and create fixtures to suit their business requirement. In the impugned order, the learned Additional District Judge noted that even on 10.01.2009 the defendants gave a complaint to police alleging theft of certain goods from the premises which only shows that the defendants were in occupation of the schedule premises even by 10.01.2009. The defendants contended that the rent is payable only from 01.02.2009. As per the terms of lease agreement, the defendants were authorized to complete all the pending works as required by them at their cost and irrespective of delay in completion of the works, the rent is payable from 01.12.2008. The defendants complain that as the plaintiff failed to install the separate electric meter for the schedule premises and also failed to get the building insured, the lease stood suspended.
7. Admittedly, the lease deed does not stipulate any such contingency of suspension of the lease. The plaintiff terminated the lease by issuing a notice dated 02.03.2009 granting one month’s time. Whether termination of the lease is valid or not is a matter to be considered at the time of trial. The learned Additional District Judge also noted in the impugned order that in another suit O.S.No.309 of 2009 in similar circumstances the defendants herein, who are tenants of another premises, were directed to deposit the arrears of rent and also the future rents and the said order was confirmed by this Court in C.R.P.No.1610 of 2010 dated 22.04.2010 and the SLP preferred against the said order was also dismissed by the Apex Court on 09.08.2010. Thereafter, the defendants filed I.A.No.16 of 2011 seeking permission to deposit a sum of Rs.3,81,150/- towards arrears of rent after deducting the income tax at source. The plaintiff claimed arrears of rent for three months i.e., for February, March and April, 2009 in a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- and after deduction of the tax at source, the defendants sought to deposit Rs.3,81,150/- by way of demand draft and the trial Court has rightly permitted the defendants to deposit the same.
8. The defendants sought a further permission to deposit the arrears of rent by way of monthly installments together with current month’s rent during the pendency of the suit. In the impugned order, it is noted that the defendants have not denied in their written statement about the arrears of rent, but their contention was that the lease period was suspended for some time and for that period they are not liable to pay the rent. Prima facie, the said contention cannot be accepted for the reason the lease deed does not stipulate any such contingency. The trial Court has rightly rejected the said prayer of the defendants to permit to deposit the arrears of rent by way of monthly installments.
9. This Court, while admitting the civil revision petition on 18.03.2011 granted interim stay on condition that the defendants shall continue to pay at Rs.1,50,000/- per month and also the arrears of admitted rent from 10.10.2009 onwards after deducting income tax and permitted the defendants to pay 50% of the previous arrears within six weeks. On 20.07.2011, the petitioners sought time for filing calculation memo showing compliance with the interim order, but no such memo is filed.
10. Be that as it may, the impugned order in I.A.No.1197 of 2009 directing the defendants to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per month from 01.02.2009 till 30.04.2009 with a further direction to the defendants to continue to pay the rents at the same rate in the first week of the succeeding month after deducting the income tax at source, does not call for any interference. The petitioners/defendants are directed to deposit the balance arrears of rent, excluding the amount, if any, already deposited in pursuance of the permission granted in I.A.No.16 of 2011 within a period of eight weeks from today and continue to deposit future monthly rents at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per month in the first week of every succeeding month during the pendency of the suit.
11. In the result, both the civil revision petitions are accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
G.V.SEETHAPATHY
21st September, 2011
Lrkm