DEEPAK KUMAR DHAWAN Vs. SARVESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) N. L. Ganguly, J. These revisions under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act are directed against the orders dated 22. 4. 1993 by which the Vth Additional District Judge, Meerut exercising power of Judge Small Causes Court decided the matter under Order XV, Rule 5, C. P. C. , as amended in U. P.

(2.) THE suits were filed by the plaintiff landlord of the accommodation in question. She claimed arrears of rent by notice, dated 20. 4. 1987. THE notice was served. A reply of the notice, was given. During proceeding in the suit the question of striking off the defence of the defendant was taken before the Court. THE defendant-applicant in the suit filed a written statements denying the relationship of the landlord and tenant between the parties. It was said that the accommodation in question was let out by Sri P. K. Kulshreshtra, who is the father of plaintiff-respondent. It was said that the rent for the accommodation in Civil Revision, No. 416 of 1993 was Rs. 700 per month and the rent of accommodation in question in Revision No. 417 of 1993 was Rs. 400/- per month as pleaded by the plaintiff. THE defendant had denied this plea and said that it was one tenancy and the total rent for both the accommodation was 700/- and not Rs. 700/- and 400/- separately.

(3.) THE Court was pleased to grant one month time on 22. 4. 1993 and the applicant instead of complying with the said order came to this Court challenging the said order and the revision was filed on 27. 8. 1993 practically about four months from the date of the order. This shows that there was no bona fide on the part of the applicant. However, the Court below was pleased to direct the applicant to deposit the entire amount of rent. Learned counsel for the applicant states that for both the revisions rent at the rate Rs. 700 has been deposited by the applicant.