INDU KHANNA Vs. ABHISHEK KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) POONAM Srivastava, J. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist Sri Manish Nigam Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of plaintiff-respondents.

(2.) THIS revision has been filed against the order dated 24-3-2005 passed by Judge Small Causes Court/special Judge N. D. P. S. Act, Ghaziabad in SCC Suit No. 51 of 2002, Abhishek and Anr. v. Smt. Indu Khanna, whereby the plaintiffs' application under Order XV Rule 5 CPC has been allowed and the revisionist's defense has been struck down. The defendant has stated that after the SCC suit was instituted, the rate of rent claimed by the landlord was Rs. 3500/- per month alleged to be due from 20- 10- 2001 to 16-6-2002 and the tenant is defaulter. Inspite of service of the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, neither the rent nor the vacant possession was handed over to the plaintiffs. The revisionist filed her written statement denying the plaint allegation and also the rate of rent was claimed Rs. 1500/- per month. It was further pleaded in the written statement that the rent till June 2001 has already been tendered and the amount claimed to be due is incorrect. The revisionist had gone out and when she came back on 26-1-2004 she found that she was forcibly evicted behind her back. The Court was also informed about the said incident on 29-1-2004 by means of an application. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff-respondents moved an application for striking off the defense which has been allowed by means of the impugned order.

(3.) FOR the reasons discussed above, this revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed. .