DEVENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. RAM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revisionist-defendant and Sri Ravi Agrawal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-opposite party.

(2.) The plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent against the defendant-revisionist, which was pending before the trial court. The aforesaid suit was numbered as S.C.C. Suit No. 3 of 2000. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, an application 24-GA has been filed by the plaintiff-landlord under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the defendant-tenant has not complied with the provisions of Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inasmuch as he is not depositing regularly the admitted rent as contemplated under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. therefore, his defence deserves to be set aside. The defendant-tenant denied the aforesaid allegation of the plaintiff-landlord and stated that he has deposited the entire admitted rent on the first date of hearing and he has not committed any default.

(3.) The trial court vide its order dated 3rd May. 2002. dismissed the objection raised by the defendant-tenant and found that the tenant has committed default and struck off the defence of the tenant. Aggrieved thereby, this revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act is filed by the tenant-revisionist, in order to appreciate the rival contention, it is necessary to reproduce the Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure :