PREM PRAKASH YADAV Vs. CHANDRA KALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a dispute between landlord and tenant. An application was filed by the plaintiff u. /o. 15, R. 5, C. P. C. for striking out the defence of the defendant on the ground that he had failed to deposit the rent due to the plaintiff. The defendant filed a chart along with an application (40/c) showing the dates when the deposit of rent was made. On considering that Chart the trial Court came to the conclusion that the rent due from the defendant had not been deposited by the 7th of every month and there was no explanation forthcoming on his behalf as to why the deposit of rent was belated. In these circumstances, the trial Court, ordered that the defence of the defendant be struck off u/o. 15, R. 5, C. P. C. Hence this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the impugned order. I have also scrutinised. the record of the case.

(3.) THE second inference is that in spite of the fact that he gave an undertaking to the High Court that he had no objection to the statement of the plaintiff an old ailing lady to be recorded by the trial Court, he refused to accept service of process when the information of the date fixed was given to him by the plaintiff's counsel. After having agreed in the High Court for getting the statement of the plaintiff recorded early, he should not have avoided to honour his commitment by not accepting process tendered to him by the plaintiff's counsel.