The court upheld the Tribunal's order for payment of rent arrears under Order 15-A of CPC, emphasizing the necessity of summary enquiry for disputed amounts.

ORDER :

As the issue involved in all the civil revision petitions is one and the same, these matters are taken up together for disposal by this Common Order.

2. The petitioners herein are the defendants and the respondents herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.09 of 2024, which was filed by the plaintiffs before the Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Tribunal, Kurnool (for short “the tribunal”) against the defendants for their ejectment from the suit schedule shop and recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits.

3. Since the facts in all the civil revision petitions are similar and identical, therefore CRP No.3260 of 2024 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

4. The facts of the case are that the respondent herein is a notified Waqf Institution. The petitioners No.1 & 2 have approached the respondent requesting to lease out petition schedule property located in Canal Road, Vijayawada to run Hotel business. The respondent accepted for the same and leased out the petition schedule shop to the petitioners No.1 & 2. The lease agreement was executed on 25-11-2020 for (11) months commencing from the month of November, 2020 to September, 2021 and monthly rent was fixed @ Rs.14,798/- exclusive of electricity and water charges. After expiry of first (11) months, the petitioners have been continuing in the possession of the petition schedule shop and the rent is on month-to-month basis, terminable by 15 days advanced notice. Right from the beginning, the petitioners have been irregular in paying monthly rents and they became defaults for the period from November, 2020 March, 2020. The petitioners paid only Rs. 13,449/- per month as against the agreed rent @ Rs.14,798/- per month. Thus, the petitioners have to pay balance rent amount of Rs.1,349/- which become Rs.22,933/- for (17) months. The petitioners paid only Rs.12,540/- for the two months i.e. April 2022 to May 2022, thus there is balance of Rs.2,258/- for (2) months i.e. Rs.4,516/-. The petitioners failed to pay monthly rents from June 2022 to November 2023 i.e. (18) months which would become Rs.2,66,364/- (14.798 x 18), thus in total as on November 2023 the petitioners are in due of Rs.2,93,813/-.

5. Despite several demands made by the respondent, the petitioners failed to pay the said due amount. The petition schedule shop is located in the heart of Vijayawada in a commercial hub and the petitioners are running "Hotel Sai Sarovar". In fact, the petition schedule shop fetches much more rent, if it is leased out today. Further, the petitioners have also obtained (5) adjacent shops from the respondent under separate lease deeds and running hotel business. The petitioners are getting copious income and that the petitioners have no authority to continue in possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule shop without paying arrears of rent. It is stated that the 1^st petitioner filed OS.No.391 of 2023 against the respondent on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Vijayawada with false allegations. Thereafter, the respondent issued a quit notice dated 27-11-2023 by Registered post demanding the petitioners to vacate the premises from 31-12-2023. Despite receipt of the said notice, the petitioners failed to vacate the premises and even failed to pay the arrears of rent. Instead, the 1^st petitioner issued a reply notice with false allegations stating that they paid rent up to 04-12-2023. As on January 2024 the petitioners are liable to pay arrears of Rs.3,23,409/-. Hence, the impugned I.A No.7 of 2024 in O.S No.9 of 2024 has been filed under Order 15-A of CPC r/w Section 151 CPC with a prayer to direct the respondents therein to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.3,23,409/- and continue to pay monthly rent of Rs.14,798/- directly to the petitioner therein till the date of delivery of possession of the suit schedule property. After considering the material on record and on hearing the submissions of both parties, the Tribunal has allow