Sanjay Misra, J. - (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Nigam, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri B.N. Rai, learned counsel for the sole plaintiff-respondent.
(2.) This revision under Section 25 of the Small Causes Courts Act has been filed against the order dated 29.07.2011 passed in S.C.C. Suit No.20 of 2009 (Manohar lal Gera v. Kanhaya Lal ) by the Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Kanpur Nagar, whereby the defence of the revisionist-tenant has been struck of under Order 15, Rule 5 C.P.C. Learned counsel for the revisionist has argued that the revisionists had deposited 9 years rent in advance on 30.05.2009 @ Rs. 25/- per month and, therefore, to say that the revisionists has committed default in depositing the amount for the years 2010-11 is incorrect. He further states that even then the revisionists deposited the rent @ Rs. 300/- per month for the month of May, 2009 to December, 2009 on 25.10.2010. According to him, thereafter from January, 2011 to April, 2011 and May, 2011 to August 2011 the amount of rent was deposited by the tender dated 18.02.2011 and 27.05.1011. According to him, the revisionists was not in default and had no intention to commit default since he was in any event depositing the monthly rent.
(3.) Sri B.N. Rai, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent has disputed the submission of learned counsel for the revisionist and has submitted that the default was committed in deposit of monthly rent since it was not deposited in the first week of every month when it was due. Such finding has been clearly recorded in the impugned order by the Courts below where it has been found that for the month of February, 2011 rent was not deposited in the first week. It has also been held that for the month of May, 2011 the amount was not deposited in the first week of the month when it was due as such the defence of the revisionist was rightly struck off under Order 15, Rule 5 C.P.C.;