HARJINDER PAL Vs. TARLOCHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been directed against the order dated 3. 5. 1997 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD) Nawanshahr. By this order the learned trial Court has allowed the application filed by the plaintiff-respondent under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC and has directed the petitioner-defendant to deposit arrears of compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,350.00 per month in the court. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondent. The case has been called out second time after a pass over was given but none is present on behalf of the respondent. Accordingly, i proceed to dispose of the matter.

(2.) MR . Arvind Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for mandatory injunction ordering/directing the defendant-petitioner to stop the user of the shop in dispute. He submits that in a suit like this, the provisions of Order 15 Rule 5 CPC are not applicable.

(3.) A bare reading of the Order 15 Rule 5 CPC clearly shows that this applies to any suit by a lessor for the eviction of the lessee after the determination of his lease, and for the recovery from him of rent or compensation for the use and occupation. Admittedly, the present suit is for mandatory injunction and as such the provisions of Order 15 Rule 5 CPC are not applicable to the present case. In view of the above discussion the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 3. 5. 1997 passed by the learned trial court is set aside.