JANKI PRASAD MISRA Vs. RANVIR SINGH RATHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision against the following order of the learned Munsif, Rae Bareli:

(2.) Sub -section (6) of Sec. 7C lays down that in any case where a deposit has been made, as aforesaid, it shall be deemed that the rent has been duly paid by the tenant to the landlord. The learned Counsel contends that by the deposit a presumption will be drawn that the rent had been duly paid and it will adversely affect his right to maintain the suit.

(3.) Under Sec. 7C the Munsif is not required to determine the rights and obligations of the landlord and tenant. All that he has to do on deposit of rent under Sec. 7C is to issue a notice to the landlord informing him that such deposit has been made. It is then open to the landlord to accept the amount or not to accept it. The Munsif has to hold the amount in deposit for the benefit of the person who may be entitled to the same. He has nothing to do further. He has nothing to do under Sub -section (6). This Sub -section operates by itself and if the deposit has been lawfully made, the rent shall be deemed to have been duly paid by the tenant to the landlord. Sub -section (1) of Sec. 7C gives the right to a tenant to deposit rent when a landlord refuses to accept any rent lawfully paid to him by the tenant. A tenant may allege that the landlord has refused to accept any rent lawfully paid to him and may deposit it but the Sec. itself does not require the Munsif to go into the question whether the landlord refuses to accept the rent lawfully or otherwise. This question is a question of fact to be determined in appropriate proceedings and if and when the question of refusal by the landlord of rent, lawfully pawl to him arises and it has been held that the deposit was made of any rent which the landlord had unlawfully refused to accept, the provisions of Sub -section (6) will apply.