SUDERSHAN KUMAR KHAJURIA Vs. HARI KRISHAN GANDOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is a tenant of respondent. He is facing eviction proceedings in the Court of learned 1st Additional Munsiff (Forest Magistrate) Jammu. Vide impugned order dated 28.04.2006 (Annexure -C), his defence was struck off as he had not deposited the arrears of rent as directed by the concerned Court and affirmed by the High Court. Being aggrieved of the said order, he has filed the instant revision petition, in which respondent -landlord was put to motion. Pursuant to notice Mr. N. A. Choudhary has pvit in appearance on his behalf. Record of the trial Court has also been summoned.

(2.) I have heard Mr. K. L. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N. A. Choudhary, learned counsel representing the respondent. Relevant material from the lower Court has also been perused by me.

(3.) MR . Sharma then submits that, no doubt the petitioner could not deposit the arrears of rent on time and moved an application before the Court concerned for extension of time, but the same was rejected without assigning any cogent reason whereas the petitioner had projected his bona fides for not depositing the arrears of rent as directed. He also moved an application for bringing on record the fact that he had already paid Rs.70,000/ - to the respondent -landlord in terms of Court order and had also attached the demand draft to the tune of Rs.10,000/ -, but the said application also stands dismissed by a separate order of even date (28.04.2006) the date on which the defence of the petitioner was struck off. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the said order also.