JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the fair and decreetal dated 08.02.2023 made in I.A.No.3 of 2022 in O.S.No. 343 of 2022 on the file of Principal District Judge, Chengalpet.)

1. The present petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal dated 08.02.2023 made in I.A.No.3 of 2022 in O.S.No. 343 of 2022 on the file of Principal District Judge, Chengalpet.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

The respondent/plaintiff/landlord filed a suit against petitioner/defendant/ tenant in O.S.No.343 of 2022 to eject the petitioner from the suit schedule property and to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.63,75,000/- for a period from April 2020 to May 2022 to the respondent. Pending suit, the respondent / landlord filed an application in I.A.No.3 of 2022 praying to direct the petitioner / defendant to produce the bank guarantee for the entire arrears of rental amount for the period from 10.04.2020 to 10.05.2022 for a sum of Rs.63,75,000/- till pending disposal of the suit, failing which to issue an order of civil arrest as against the petitioner / defendant. On 08.02.2023, the learned Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram, directed the petitioner/ Defendant to pay or deposit the rental arrears of Rs.63,75,000/- on or before 30.03.2023 in default ordered that the petitioner/defendant loses the opportunity of defending the case. Challenging the same the present Revision is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition is not maintainable in the present suit, since it is a suit contemplated under Section 16 of the Civil Procedure Code. Rule 1 of Order 38 CPC does not contemplate furnishing security for any amounts due, but is a provision for furnishing security for ‘appearance’. Specifically where the defendant has absconded or is about to abscond or leave the local limits of the court and where the presence is required. In the instant case, there is no allegation whatsoever of this nature and the petitioner not only entered appearance through a counsel, but also filed a suit against the respondent in O.S. 18 of 2020 which is pending on the file of Additional District Munsif Court, Alandur and there is no cause for furnishing any security, much less a Bank guarantee. The amount claimed is not an admitted amount.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the court below gravely erred in directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.63,75,000/- on or before 30.03.2023 and further proceeded to direct that on failure to pay the said amount, the petitioner would lose the opportunity to defend. Further, the court below ought to have seen that order XXXVII contemplates arrest first before a Security is furnished and does not contemplate denying the petitioner the opportunity to contest the suit. Hence prayed to set aside the order passed by the trial Court.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that on 24.12.2019 after an elaborate discussion between both the parties, the petitioner mutually agreed to vacate the suit premises within 3 months from the date of the said endorsement. Within 10 days from the date of endorsement i.e., in the month of January 2020, the petitioner / defendant, without disclosing the above said fact of endorsement has filed a suit for permanent injunction as against the respondent in O.S.No.18/2020 before the learned Additional District Munsif, Alandur and the same is pending before the said Court. Taking advantage of filing a suit, the petitioner wantonly refused to pay the rent from the month of April 2020 inspite of repeated demands. The respondent is a senior citizen attained the age of 65 years and also a cardio patient, bye-pass surgery was done and also inserted pace maker. The said rental income is the only source of income to fulfill the respondent's family commitments and for his medical treatment. Hence prayed to dismiss the Re