N. Deendayalan v. N. Annukumar

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4963 of 2014 ORDER:

Learned counsel for the petitioners, though does not press the C.R.P. on merits, submits that some of the petitioners, whom he could not name, are not receiving any rent, and therefore, it would not be possible for them to comply with the order impugned in the C.R.P. He seeks liberty to the petitioners to make application before the Court below for appropriate order. By the impugned order, passed on I.A.No.35 of 2013, petitioners 1, 3 and 4, i.e. respondents 1, 3 and 4 before the Court below, are directed to deposit the rent received by them from the tenants to the credit of the suit from the month of March, 2013. A careful reading of the order shows that these respondents are directed to deposit the future rent from 01.08.2014 "received" by them to the credit of the suit. If any of them (i.e. respondent Nos.

1, 3 and 4) is really not receiving the rent at all, perhaps the question of depositing such rent would not arise. However, he/she will have to say so on affidavit and bring it to the notice of the Court below, in which eventuality, I hope and trust, the Court below shall pass appropriate order, after verifying correctness of the statements made on oath.

With these observations, C.R.P. is disposed of as not

pressed. It is made clear that I have not examined merits of the case. No costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.

_____________________ DILIP B.BHOSALE,J Dt:30.01.2015 kdl