JAI BHAGWAN Vs. CHANDRA MOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two interesting questions which arise for determination in this revision petition are as to whether O. 15, R. 5 Code of Civil Procedure is retrospective so as to affect pending cases and whether the Court has no discretion to extend the time for deposit of arrears of rent etc.

(2.) The suit filed by the respondents for possession of the shop in dispute is pending trial before the Court of learned Sub Judge, Charkhi Badri. The plaintiff-respondents have claimed themselves to be the owners of the shop in question and have pleaded that after termination of tenancy of the tenant-petitioner, the latter has no right to continue with the possession of the suit property. The defendant-petitioner has contested the suit by alleging that the plaintiff-respondents do not have any right to seek his eviction. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant-petitioner filed an application under O. VI, R. 17, Code of Civil Procedure, for amendment of the written statement and the plaintiff-respondents filed an application to strike off the defence of the defendant-petitioner under O. XV, R. 5, Code of Civil Procedure, on the ground of non-payment of rent/ compensation for use and occupation of the suit premises.

(3.) After considering the cases set up by the parties, the learned Sub Judge rejected the application for amendment filed by the defendant-petitioner and allowed the application filed by the plaintiff-respondents to strike off the defence of the petitioner. The learned Sub Judge held that the provision contained in O. XV, R. 5, C. P. C. introduced by notification dated 10-5-1991 is retrospective in character. The learned Sub Judge further held that as the defendant-petitioner has failed to pay the rent/compensation together with interest for use and occupation of the shop in dispute, his defence is liable to be struck off.