CRP/4732/2025 of T.Shiv Kumar Vs B.Vijaya on 20 February 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4732 OF 2025

Petition under Article 227 of the Constrtution of lndia aggrieved by the Order daled 22-1O-2025 passed in lA.No.233 of 2024 in O.S.No.1114 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad.

Between:

T.Shiv Kumar, S/o T.Pandu Aged 39 years, Occ . Business, Prop of Vinayaka Traders, Wholesale Gunny IVlerchanI, 15-2-184, 15-2-1841111, 15-2-18412, I\ilaharaj Gunj, Hyderabad

... Petitioner /Respondent /Defendant

AND

'l . B.Vijaya, Wo B.Balaiah Aged 74 years, occ House Wife Rep by her GPA

Holder B.Balaiah S/o Veereshalrngam, Aged B0 years, Occ Retired Employee and Self Professional R/o 16-.1 1-1lsl8lc. Saleemnagar Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad-36. Cell 9848053721

2. Pritesh Lodaya, Sio Laher Chad Lodaya Aged about 45 years, occ . Busiess, R/o H.No. 3-4-19 and 19-1. Flat No 201 , Block-B. SR Dr. Bomanna Enclave, Barkatpura, Himayathnagar, Kachiguda, Hyderabad.

3. Poonam Lodaya, W/o Pritesh Lodaya Aged aboul 42 years, occ . House Wife.

R/o H.No. 3-4-19 and 19-1 , FIat No.201, Block-B, SR Dr. Bomanna Enclave, Barkatpura, Himayathnagar, Kachiguda, Hyderabad.

...Respondents/Petitioners/Plaintiffs

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 15'l of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O S.No.1 11412024 on the file of XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, pending disposal of above Civil Revision Petition before this Hon"ble court.

Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri B Sheshu Kumar Counsel for the Petitioner R1 :--- Counsel for the Respondents 2 & 3 Sri.R.A.Achuthanand The Court made the following: ORDER

IN TH[, IIIGI{ COURT FOR. THB STATE OF TELANCANA AT

HYDERABAD

.tIIE IIONOURABI,E SRT JUSTICE P.SA]!T KOSIIY

Civil Revision Pctition No.4732 of2025

D ate;20.02.2026

Between:

T.Shiva Kurnar

'"Petitioncr

AND

B.Vijaya & others.

"'l{cspondents

OIIDER: @er Hon'ble SriJustkt P &tn Kolht1

The present is the Civil Rcvision Pctition u'hich has bcen filed assailing the order clatecl 22. 10.2025 passcd in I'A'No'231 of 2024 in O.S.No.l l14 ol702tl.

2. Vide the irnpugned order, thc tlial Coutl has allorvcd the orderl5A'Ruleland2petitionliledbytlreplaintil.I.l-arrdlord against the petitioner' The suit is oue seeking eviction and also recovery of an.ears of rent along with damages and lLrttttc rellt.'l-he Courlhasallowedthet5Apetitiondirectirlgtlrelletitionerto deposit arrears of rent ol Rs. 1,t7,000/- within 60 days and also directed the petitioner to pay luturc rettt ol'Rs'9,000"- pt:r month to

thc pctitioners to be paid on or befbre l0tr' o1' evcr r succeeding month.

J. [-carncd counsel tbr the petitioner subr.Lits that thc inrpugncd ordcr is crrorlcous lor the reason that the r' was an oral agrecrnent between the parlies and as per plaint its: f, the agreecl rcnt was I(s.4,5001 whiclr is agreed to be paid fl'onr he 1,ear 2000

arrd since then petitioncr \ /as paying rent regularly rs such thcrc was no dclault and finding of the trial Coun was err('r eous

4. Flowcvcr, ou thc perusal of the record and al er taking into consideration thc sultrrissions of lcaured counsel. il tas infirlmecl that thorc is no docurnentary proof available lbr rl r l.lclitioncr to cstablish thc lirct thal. the pctitioner has paid thc nr,,nthly rent as agreed upon. [n the abscnce ofany cogent and tan!irle recorrls to establish paynlcnt ol- rent, the ordel passed by thc tl i I Courl so l-ar as paymcnt ol' arrcars of rent does not waffal t intcrlerence Ikrwever. lhis Court only relaxes the time grantr:, by the trial Courr which rvas (r0 days as on22.10.2025 which ri I datc has not been compliecl. Ioday, since this Court is disposin i ol the Civil

Revision Pctition, let the arrears of lent bc lurther dcpositcd by thc petitioner within a period of 45 days and if the petitioner lails to deposit within 45 days, the order passed by this Court in this instant Civil Revision Petition would lose its elllcacy so lhr as future rent is concerned

5. Since, there is dispute raised on agreed rent to be llaid of Rs.4,500/-, though this Court is not interfering with thc ordcr o[

trial Court so f-ar as paylnent of future rent at Rs'9,000/-, consideling long lapse o[' tirne li'orn the date thc arllount o{'

Rs.4,500/- was agreed, let the said atrount of I{s 9,000/- bc quantified by the trial Clourt and the amount so paici cvct'y trlonth be deposited in the concerned Court seized of the matter' Iltrwcvcr, thc respondent/plaintifT be entitled tbr tlre rvithdran,al of the saicl amount only to the extcnt ol Rs.4,500i- as agreed upotr irt the plaint to be the agreed montltly rent. The lhte ol the rcmaining Dortion of the amourrt ',vhich rvould stand depositcd betbre thc trial Court would be tinally decided at the time of {inalization ol-the suit itself '

6. With the albresaid observations, this (l vil Revision Petition is disposcd of.

Cclrtsequcrrtly, nriscellancous petitions pen Iing, if any, shall stand closcd

.-.---,

I; )/- L.VIJAYA LAXMI

ASS I ;TANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'l . The XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad 2 One CC to SRl. B SHESHU KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC

3. One CC to Sri R.A.Achuthanand,Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies

ADK/PSI,

tu,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2010212026