The Court considered the impact of the pandemic on the tenant's ability to pay and granted exemption from payment for a specific period.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard.

2. Both these applications are decided by this common order, as they are interconnected.

3. It is a dispute between the landlord and the tenant. The revision application has been filed by tenant against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the appellate Court, directing the applicants to vacate the suit premises.

4. While admitting the civil revision application, this Court vide order dated 11.01.2018, passed the following order:

"3. There shall be an interim relief restraining respondents from evicting the applicants in pursuance to the impugned orders, subject to the following conditions:

(a) Applicants to file an undertaking in this Court that they will not part with possession or create any third party rights in the suit premises and that they will personally use the premises. That undertaking to be filed within a period of four weeks from today by furnishing advance copy to the learned Counsel for Respondents;

(b) The applicants will deposit, in this Court, within a period of four weeks from today a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) towards compensation/arrears. Upon deposit, the respondents shall be at liberty to withdraw the same by filing an undertaking that such withdrawal shall abide by the final orders in this Civil Revision Application;

(c) The applicants shall, with effect from 31st March, 2018, deposit in this Court, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) per month by way of compensation. From out of this amount, respondents shall be at liberty to withdraw a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rs. Five Thousand) per month. This shall be subject to filing an omnibus undertaking that such monthly withdrawals shall abide by final orders in this Civil Revision Application.

4 The determination of compensation/arrears in terms of clause (b) above is only provisional and this shall not preclude respondents from instituting execution proceedings, in case the respondents are of the opinion that they are entitled to further amount in terms of the decree already made. That execution proceedings shall be decided on their own merits and in accordance with law.

5 The determination of Rs. 15,000/- towards reasonable compensation is in terms of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case State of Maharashtra & another Vs. Super Max International Pvt. Ltd. & others, (2009) 9 SCC 772; and Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. Federal Motors (P) Ltd., (2005) 1 SCC 705. This is because the suit premises admeasures around 200 square feet and are said to be used for commercial purpose.

6 In case of any two consecutive or three non consecutive defaults in deposit of compensation at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per month, this interim relief stands vacated without any further reference to this Court. The Registry to invest the deposited amount in a Nationalised Bank possibly in some recurring deposit at the rate of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) per month, since, it is expected that the respondents will withdraw sum of Rs.5000/- (Rs. Five thousand) per month.

7 All contentions of all parties are left open in this regard."

5. Vide civil application No.556 of 2020, the applicants (respondents in civil revision application) have prayed for permission to withdraw the amount deposited towards compensation.

6. Vide aforesaid order dated 11.01.2018, this Court has already given liberty to withdraw the sum of Rs.50,000/- deposited towards compensation/arrears and sum of Rs.5000/- per month out of Rs. 15,000/- deposited per month. As such, there is no question of again granting the applicants liberty to withdraw the amount in terms of clause (b) and (c) of the aforesaid order.

7. Learned Advocate for the respondents/tenants would however submit that the applicant Prashant Shukla has sought for permission to withdraw the amount, while the amount is to be paid all the representatives of the original landlord. According to him, if Prashant Shukla is paid the amount, the other legal representatives may claim the amount