BACHCHE LAL CHAURASIYA Vs. ANIL KUMAR BARANWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Neeraj Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Rashmi Tripathi, learned counsel for the defendant-tenant/revisionist and Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the plaintiff-landlord/opposite party.

(2.) On 6.2.2018 this revision was heard on length and after noticing brief facts of the case, the following order was passed:

(3.) Today supplementary affidavit of Shri Anurag Sahu has been filed on behalf of defendant-revisionist. Along with this affidavit certified copy of the application dated 28.4.2014 has been filed as Annexure S.A.-1 which does not pertain to the stand taken by the learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist as noted in the last paragraph of the aforequoted order dated 6.2.2018. Undisputedly defendant-revisionist has failed to deposit the rent so as to claim protection of Order XV Rule 5, C.P.C. The law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gokaran Singh Vs. 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hardoi and others, 2000 1 ARC 653 is fully applicable on the facts of the present case. In the aforesaid case the Full Bench held that deposit of rent under section 30 of the Act, after receiving notice of demand, is not permissible and any such deposit, if made, will not be of any benefit of the defendant. The defendant will have to be treated defaulter in payment of rent for the period subsequent to the receipt of notice given by the landlord indicating his intention to receive the rent directly.