Anjani Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard Sri P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revisionist-defendant and Sri Ravi Agrawal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-opposite party.
(2.) The plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent against the defendant-revisionist, which was pending before the trial court. The aforesaid suit was numbered as S.C.C. Suit No. 3 of 2000. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, an application 24-GA has been filed by the plaintiff-landlord under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the defendant-tenant has not complied with the provisions of Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inasmuch as he is not depositing regularly the admitted rent as contemplated under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. therefore, his defence deserves to be set aside. The defendant-tenant denied the aforesaid allegation of the plaintiff-landlord and stated that he has deposited the entire admitted rent on the first date of hearing and he has not committed any default.
(3.) The trial court vide its order dated 3rd May. 2002. dismissed the objection raised by the defendant-tenant and found that the tenant has committed default and struck off the defence of the tenant. Aggrieved thereby, this revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act is filed by the tenant-revisionist, in order to appreciate the rival contention, it is necessary to reproduce the Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure : "Order XV Rule 5.Striking off defence for failure to deposit admitted rent. etc.-(l) in any suit by a lessor for the eviction of a lessee after the determination of his lease and for the recovery from him of rent or compensation for use and occupation, the defendant shall, at or before the first hearing of the suit, deposit the entire amount admitted by him to be due together with interest thereon at the rate of nine per cent per annum and whether or not he admits any amount to be due, he shall throughout the continuation of the suit regularly deposit the monthly amount due within a week from the date of its accrual, and in the event of any default in making the deposit of the entire amount admitted by him to be due or the monthly amount due as aforesaid, the Court may subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2) strike off his defence : Provided that such withdrawal shall not have the effect of prejudicing any claim by the plaintiff disputing the correctness of the amount deposited : Provided further that if the amount deposited includes any sums claimed by the depositor to be deductible on any account, the Court may require the plaintiff to furnish the security for such sum before he is allowed to withdraw the same.";