- (1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS is tenant's writ petition directed against orders passed by Judge Small Causes Court and Additional District Judge, Saharanpur striking off the defence of the tenant-petitioner. Landlords- respondent Nos. 3 to 5 Suresh Chandra and another filed S. C. C. Suit No. 31 of 1983 against tenant- petitioner. In the said suit an application was given by the plaintiff for striking off the defence of the tenant-petitioner under Order XV, Rule 5, C. P. C. The default was that after depositing the rent within time until 31. 12. 1984, the rent for the whole year of 1985 was deposited on 16. 8. 1985. Tenant pleaded that suit was dismissed in default on 19. 7. 1984 and thereafter it was restored without intimation to the tenant on 28. 9. 1984 and thereafter the suit was transferred to Civil Judge, Saharanpur and petitioner came to know about the transfer on 3. 1. 1985. The Trial Court held that on 3. 1. 1985 and 9. 5. 1985 presence of both the parties was noted on the order sheet. It was further contended by the tenant that even though he deposited the rent late but it had been withdrawn by the landlord. Ultimately defence was struck off by the J,s. C. C. /iind Additional Civil Judge, Saharanpur through order dated 3. 3. 1986. Against the said order petitioner filed S. C. C. Revision No. 92 of 1986 which was dismissed by Illrd Additional District Judge, Saharanpur on 14. 10. 1985 hence this writ petition.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent has vehemently supported the im pugned orders. LEARNED Counsel has further argued that release application under section 21 of the Act was also filed against the tenant which was al lowed, appeal was dismissed thereafter writ petition was dismissed. However, afterwards review application was filed in the writ petition and thereupon matter was remanded to the prescribed authority to consider some other aspects also. LEARNED Counsel has further stated that after remand in review by this Court tenant is delaying the proceedings. However, proceedings under section 21 of the Act are quite distinct and they cannot have any bearing upon the instant writ petition which is directed against orders striking off the defence.;