GAURAV VIDEO LIBRARY Vs. PREM KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated November 25, 1992 by which he dismissed the appeal filed under Section 22, Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter called "the Act") against the order of the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar dated January 3, 1992 ordering striking of the defence under Section 13(5) of the Act. The facts of the case may be summarised thus.

(2.) THE plaintiff-respondent filed a suit against the defendant-appellants for their ejectment from the suit shop on the ground of default in payment of rent. On May 9, 1991, the trial court provisionally determined the amount of Rs. 16,800/- @ Rs. 800/- per month for the period from July 22, 1989 to April 21, 1991 and Rs. 840/- as interest under Section 13(3) of the Act. These amounts were deposited by the defendant-appellants. The amounts of rent of the subsequent two months i.e. from April 22, 1991 to May 21, 1991 and from May 22, 1991 to June 21, 1991 were deposited on June 10, 1991 and July 13, 1991 respectively. The plaintiff-respondent moved an application under Section 13(3) of the Act for striking out the defence on the ground that these deposits were not made in time. In their reply, the defendants admitted that the two amounts of Rs. 800/- each were deposited on June 10, 1991 and July 13, 1991 respectively. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, the learned trial Court struck out the defence by its order dated January 3, 1992. In the memorandum of their appeal filed under Section 22 of the Act, the defendants stated that the amounts of monthly rent were deposited as advised by their counsel and there was no delay as amounts were deposited before the 15th day of the subsequent Gregorian calendar month. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Single Judge dismissed the appeal by his order dated November 25, 1992 as said above.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , defence was struck out by Single Judge under Section 13(5) of the Act for depositing the rent of two months, namely, (1) from April 22, 1991 to May 21, 1991 and (2) May 22, 1991 to June 21, 1991 by 15 days of the succeeding month as required under Section 13(4) of the Act. These amounts of rent were deposited on June 10, 1991 and July 13, 1991 respectively. The application for extension of time in respect of these two deposits was moved before the learned Single Judge stating that the defendants have no intention to commit any default in payment of rent and they deposited the rent as per advice of their counsel Mr. Subhash Narang, Advocate, Sri Ganganagar. Admittedly, no application was moved before the trial Court for the extension of time. It was also not urged during arguments that the amounts were deposited as per advice of their counsel. The learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the defendant-appellant did not file any affidavit of their counsel in support of their application.