ANSHUL JATANA Vs. IQBAL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula allowing an application moved by the respondents-owners claiming admitted rent under Order 15 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) THE plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit for possession and recovery of the rent. In the said petition an application under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC was moved by the respondents-plaintiffs claiming that the petitioner herein should be directed to pay the admitted rent and continue paying the admitted rent every month during the pendency of the suit together with interest.

(3.) MR . Arun Palli, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the around that the order passed is not in consonance with the provisions of Order 15 Rule 5 CPC as it is only the admitted rent which can be ordered to be paid and not the rent which was disputed. The contention of learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that by way of lease deed dated 30.5.2001, the premises in dispute were rented out to the petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs. 36,000/-. It is further the case of the petitioner that though as per the lease deed, parties have agreed that there would be increase of 7% every year and the amount to be paid in respect of every year was also mentioned in the lease deed. However, the said stipulation was not acted upon by the parties and the petitioner continued to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 36,000/- which was accepted by the owner of the premises and thus for all purposes, the rent settled between the parties is to be taken as Rs. 36,000/-.