S.Harkauli, J. - (1.) I have heard the learned counsel for both sides. Order 15,R.5 CPC as added in U.P. requires that the tenant/defendant should deposit the arrears of rent which is admitted by him to be due with interest at the first hearing. He should also deposit future rent month to month during the pendency of the suit. Failing such deposit the defence in the suit is liable to be struck off.
(2.) IN this particular case, the tenant/petitioner in his written statement has denied the relationship of the landlord and tenant, and therefore obviously no rent could be said to be admittedly due. He did not deposit any amount towards rent. His defence was struck off on the finding that relationship of the landlord and tenant exited. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the clear words of Order 15R.5 as interpreted by a decision of this Court in the case of Rakesh and Company v. Heera Lal, 2001 (44) ALR 804 for the proposition that only such amount is liable to be deposited which is admitted to be due.
(3.) ON the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents, Sri R.B. Singhal submits that words "rent admitted by the tenant to be due" used in Order 15,R.5 CPC should be interpreted to mean "rent found by the Court to be due although not admitted fry the tenant to be due".;