PANKAJ Vs. VIJAY KUMAT SAHDEV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel For the parties this appeal is being finally disposed of at this stage. The appeal raises a question as to the scope of the provisions of Rule 10 of Order XXXIX Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').

(2.) Briefly the facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellant herein is facing a suit for recovery of Rs.1,69,920.00 filed by the respondent herein. The suit has been filed with the averments that the plaintiff is the owner of property No.A-/4, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and defendant was inducted as a tenant therein on a monthly rent of Rs.12,000.00 as per agreement dated 15/7/1998, rent being payable in advance in the first week of each calendar month. Defendant having failed to pay the rent with effect from. June 1999, the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of arrears to the tune of Rs.1,44,000.00 and a sum of Rs.25,920.00 towards interest calculated at the rate of 18% per annum. The defendant is stated to have filed a false and frivolous suit against the plaintitff. The prayer clause in the plaint reads as under :-

(3.) The defendant is contesting the suit on a variety of grounds and the plea that the plaintiff while issuing the receipt dated 7/5/1999 had agreed to relinquish the rent till the electric supply was restored to the tenanted premises.