S.U. Khan, J. - (1.) IN this case learned Counsel for the landlord -respondent is no more. He died several years before still landlord has not engaged any other Counsel. As the matter is quite old and further proceedings of suit have been stayed hence this writ petition is being disposed of without issuing fresh notice to landlord. In case landlord feels aggrieved by this judgment he is at liberty to apply for recall of the same Through this writ petition order passed by Munsif, Moradabad in Suit No. 171 of 1977 dated 1.3.1979 striking off the defence of tenant petitioner and Revisional Court's order passed in Civil Revision No. 126 of 1979 dated 4.12.1979 by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Moradabad have been challenged alongwith order dated 5.10.1981 passed by Trial Court and order dated 22.10.1982 passed by Revisional Court i.e. IIIrd A.D.J., Moradabad in Civil Revision No. 250 of 1981. Both the Courts below struck off the defence of the tenant -petitioner on the ground that the provision of Order 15, Rule 5, C.P.C. was mandatory and the date of first hearing was the date on which written statement was to be filed. Both these points require reconsideration in view of the following Supreme Court authorities: - 1. : AIR 1981 SC 1657.
(2.) : AIR 1995 SC 985. : AIR 2002 SC 1252. (Dealing with provision for striking off the defence) 1. : AIR 2002 SC 955. 2. : AIR 2002 SC 2520. (Dealing with first date of hearing) 2. As the orders striking off the defence have been set -aside and the matter is being remanded to the Trial Court for fresh decision on the said point hence there is no need to judge the validity or otherwise of the order passed by the Trial Court on 5.10.1981 and confirmed by Revisional Court by order dated 22.10.1982 as the said order was dependent upon and consequence of the order striking off the defence. Accordingly writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders striking off the defence of tenant -petitioner are set -aside Trial Court is directed to decide the question of striking of the defence afresh after providing opportunity to both the parties in the light of above Supreme Court authorities. ;