MORE SINGH Vs. CHANDRIKA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is challenging the order passed by Judge Small Causes in SCC Suit No. 4 of 2008, dated 15.3.2011, whereby his defence was struck off under Order 15, Rule 5 CPC and the order dated 30.5.2015 passed by the revisional court affirming the said order. Judge Small Causes has recorded a categorical finding of fact that the admitted arrears of rent were not deposited by the petitioner on the first date of hearing. The court has noted, that the petitioner, who is defendant in the suit, was duly served on 8.4.2008 and he appeared before the court on 28.2.2009 and filed written statement on 28.2.2009. But he did not make any deposit, either of arrears of rent or of monthly rent. The deposits made under Section 30, after first date of hearing of the suit, were held to be illegal. The revisional court, while dismissing the revision, apart from affirming the findings recorded by Judge Small Causes, also took into consideration the plea of the petitioner that he had deposited the rent in the suit. The revisional court has held that all the challans, which the petitioner had brought on record by way of paper no. 30 (Ga), relates to the period after the filling of the written statement and striking off of the defence. These deposits were made by the petitioner at his own risk.

(2.) In such view of the matter, the revisional court held that the order of the Judge Small Causes striking off the defence is perfectly justified.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had deposited the rent in proceedings under Section 30 of the UP Act XIII of 1972 and the courts below, while passing the orders have not taken into consideration the deposits so made.