A landlord-tenant relationship must be acknowledged for the court to enforce rent deposits; mere denial does not negate the obligation to pay legally due rent.

ORDER :

1. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner-plaintiff aggrieved by the order, dated 05.07.2019, in I.A.No.330 of 2018 in O.S.No.554 of 2018 passed by the learned V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order XV-A read with 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to direct the respondents-defendants to deposit the arrears of rent @ Rs.25,000/- per month for the period from October, 2012 to June, 2018 i.e. for a period of nine months, amounting to Rs.2,25,000/- and continue to deposit the future rents at the same rate till disposal of the suit, was dismissed.

2. Heard Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Venkatesh Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the record.

3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner-plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit for eviction of the respondents-defendants from the suit schedule property i.e., H.No.1-1-261/15/G and 1-1-261/15/G1 consisting of ground plus pent house situated at Road No.1, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, and for arrears of rent and mesne profits. The petitioner is the absolute owner and landlord of aforesaid suit schedule property and the same was let-out to the respondents in the year 1987 on a monthly rent of Rs.25,000/-. It is stated that till September 2017, the respondents paid rent and from October, 2017 they have committed default in payment of rent. Therefore, the petitioner issued notice, dated 16.04.2018 under Section 106 of the Act, 1882 (for short, ‘the Act, 1882’) calling upon the respondents to pay the arrears of rent and to vacate the suit schedule property within 30 days from the date of receipt of said notice. But, no reply was given to the said notice. Pending suit, the petitioner filed the aforesaid application seeking to pay the arrears of rent @ Rs.25,000/- per month.

4. The respondents-defendants filed counter-affidavit denying the averments made in the application stating that on 14.08.1987, the petitioner has agreed to sell the front portion of the suit schedule property to an extent of 180 square yards for a consideration of Rs.3,25,000/- and on the same day his father P.Rajamouli paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- as advance to the petitioner and as a consequence on 17.08.1987, an Agreement of Sale was entered by and between his father and the petitioner in respect of the said land. It is stated that as per the said Agreement his father has to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner on or before 30.09.1987 and on receipt of the said amount, the petitioner has to handover the vacant possession to the father of the respondents. The petitioner also sold rear side portion of 210 square yards to father of the respondents for a consideration of Rs.4,00,000/-. After purchase of the same, the said P.Rajamouli became owner of entire suit schedule property. After death of Rajamouli on 25.03.2018, the respondents are in continuous possession and enjoyment of the property. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondents are tenants of the suit schedule property and hence, they are liable to pay rent, arrears of rent and future rents.

5. Considering the contentions and rival contentions of both parties and also the documents Exs.P.1 to P.5 and Exs.R.1 to R.16, the learned trial Court dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed contending that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate that though the petitioner got issued notice to the respondents under Section 106 of the Act, 1882 demanding them to vacate the premises and to pay the monthly rent @ Rs.25,000/- with arrears of rent, there was no response to the said notice;the learned trial Court did not consider that there was a false plea set up by the respondents claiming that they are enjoying the property through Agreement of Sale executed by the petitioner; that even in case of Agreeme