YOGENDRA PAL SINGH Vs. ASHISH AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is preferred against the order dated 15.07.2013 passed by Additional District Judge/ Special Judge (Anti Corruption) Bareilly passed in SCC Suit No. 18/2012, Ashish Agrawal Vs. Yogendra Pal Singh .

(2.) The brief facts of this revision are that respondent field a suit for ejectment in the Court of District Judge, Bareilly registered as S.C.C. Suit No. 18/2012, which was transferred to the Court of Additional District Judge/ Special Judge (Anti Corruption) Bareilly. During the pendency of that suit an application was moved by plaintiff under Order 15 Rule 5 with the prayer that the defence of the defendant be struck off. In the application it was mentioned that the plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of rent and ejectment and as per the provision of Order 15 Rule 5 C.P.C., it was mandatory for the defendant to deposit the rent up to the 7th day of the every month. The defendant has not been deposited the same, hence the defence of the defendant are struck off. The defendant filed objection stating therein that the application has been moved just in order to delay the disposal of the suit. The plaintiff has already received rent in advance against receipt and no rent is due and therefore, the application is liable to be rejected.

(3.) Another application 23 (C) was moved by the defendant with the prayer that the amount of Rs. 38,400.00 was paid vide its receipt dated 30.12.2011 and which was rent of the 24 months was paid to the plaintiff, hence that above amount should be adjusted against amount deposited under Sec. 20(4) of the U.P. Rent Control Act 13 of 1972. The plaintiff filed objection 24(C) and stated therein that since the rent of the premises in question is more than Rs. 2,000.00 per month, hence the provision of Act 13 of 1972 are not applicable to the premises in question.