SHYAMLAL AGRAWAL Vs. SARDAR GURUBACHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 1-5-1993, passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 111-A/91, whereby the trial Court has rejected the application filed by the applicants against the non-applicant under Section 13 (6) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (henceforth 'the Act' ). It is not in dispute that the non-applicant has not deposited the rent after he was served with notice of demand and, thereafter, with summons. As per Section 13 (1) of 'the Act', he was required to deposit the arrears of rent within the one month of receipt of summons. He could also apply for extension of time for deposit of arrears of rent after expiry of one month and having obtained extension, he was required to deposit future rent of each succeeding month by every fifteenth day. The non-applicant did not take any step to deposit the rent and, therefore, the applicants filed an application for striking out the defence under Section 13 (6) of 'the Act'.

(2.) THE non-applicant opposed this application. In his reply, he stated that he is not the tenant of the applicants. It was claimed that he was not the tenant of the vendor of the applicants. The non-applicant claimed that he was in possession of the suit house by virtue of an agreement to sell dated 18-8- 1982 from one Amarjeet Singh Chhabra for a consideration of Rs. 65,000/ (Rupees Sixty-five Thousand ). It was further stated that he had paid an advance of Rs. 11,100/ (Rupees Eleven Thousand One Hundred) to Amarjeet Singh Chhabra. The non-applicant further claimed that Amarjeet Singh Chhabra had committed breach of contract and therefore, he had filed Civil Suit No. 21-A/85 for specific performance of contract dated 18-8-1982. For all these reasons, he was not bound to deposit the rent under Section 13 (6) of the Act.

(3.) THE trial Court accepted the contention of the non-applicant and refused to strike out the defence, despite the fact the non-applicant did not deposit the rent in the Court nor did he show any desire to deposit the rent.