MANGAT SINGH TRILOKCHAN SINGH Vs. SATPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The High Court by the orders impugned in these appeals has reversed the judgment of trial Court and defence of the petitioners-tenants in each of the cases has been struck off on the alleged ground of non-deposit of arrears of rent within the specified period in accordance with provisions of Order XV, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code).

(2.) The trial Court by separate orders passed in each of the cases had rejected the prayer of the landlords for striking off the defence and allowed the applications of the appellants-tenants seeking permission to deposit the arrears of rent.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel Shri G. L. Sanghi appearing for the appellants-tenants has brought to our notice the contents of the summons served by the trial Court on the tenants after the institution of the suit for eviction against them. Relying on the contents of the summons, the submission made is that only a date of appearance of the parties was intimated and it was not a date fixed for hearing of the suit. It is further submitted that since the date mentioned in the summons was not the date for hearing of the parties in the suit, the period specified for deposit of rent under Order XV, Rule 5 of the Code could not be reckoned from that date. Reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in Sham Lal (Dead) by L.Rs. vs. Atme Nand Jain Sabha Regd.; Dal Bazar (1987) 1 SCC 222 and Bimal Chand Jain vs. Sri Gopal Agarwal (1981) 3 SCC 486.