Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. - (1.) Heard Shri Neeraj Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Rashmi Tripathi, learned counsel for the defendant-tenant/revisionist and Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the plaintiff-landlord/opposite party.
(2.) On 6.2.2018 this revision was heard on length and after noticing brief facts of the case, the following order was passed: "Heard Sri Neeraj Tiwari holding brief of Ms. Rashmi Tripathi, learned counsel for defendant-tenant/ revisionist and Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the plaintiff-landlord/ opposite party. This Revision under Section 25 of Provincial Small Cause Court Act, 1887 has been filed praying to set aside the judgment and decree 08.11.2017 in SCC No.58 of 2012 (Anil Kumar Baranwal vs. Bachche Lal Chaurasiya) passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.14, Varanasi. By the impugned judgment, the suit was decreed and the defendant-tenant/ revisionist was directed to vacate the disputed shop within three months and to handover its vacant and peaceful possession to the plaintiff-landlord/ opposite party. The suit has been decreed by the impugned judgment on the finding that the defendant-tenant/ revisionist appeared in the suit on 23.02.2013 and filed his written statement on 10.05.2013 but he continued to deposit the rent under Section 30 of the U.P. Act 13 of 1972 in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Varanasi till 02.01.2014. Therefore, the defendant-tenant/ revisionist cannot have the protection of Order XV Rule 5 C.P.C. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-landlord/ opposite party has placed a copy of the judgment dated 30.08.2017 in matters under Article 227 No.4290 of 2017 (Smt. Kalawati vs. Deen Dayal Sharma) in which following the Full Bench judgment of this court reported in 2000 (1) ARC 653, it has been held that deposit of rent made by the tenant after receipt of notice of demand, is not permissible and any such deposit of rent will not be of any benefit to the tenant. The tenant will have to be treated as defaulter in payment of rent for the period subsequent to the receipt of notice given by the landlord intimating his intention to receive the rent directly. Learned counsel for the defendant-tenant/ revisionist submits that when the defendant-tenant/ revisionist had put in appearance in the aforesaid suit, he filed an application for adjustment of rent deposited under Section 30 of the Act and the said Application was allowed, and permission was granted by the court of Additional District Judge to deposit the rent. Thereafter, the defendant-petitioner has deposited the rent before the court below. Therefore, he cannot be said to be defaulter in payment of rent. He, therefore, submits that the adverse finding recorded in the impugned judgment is perverse. He prays for and is granted two days' time to file a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith certified copies of all relevant papers in support of his aforementioned submission. As prayed, put up on 09.02.2018."
(3.) Today supplementary affidavit of Shri Anurag Sahu has been filed on behalf of defendant-revisionist. Along with this affidavit certified copy of the application dated 28.4.2014 has been filed as Annexure S.A.-1 which does not pertain to the stand taken by the learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist as noted in the last paragraph of the aforequoted order dated 6.2.2018. Undisputedly defendant-revisionist has failed to deposit the rent so as to claim protection of Order XV Rule 5, C.P.C. The law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gokaran Singh Vs. 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hardoi and others, 2000 1 ARC 653 is fully applicable on the facts of the present case. In the aforesaid case the Full Bench held that deposit of rent under section 30 of the Act, after receiving notice of demand, is not permissible and any such deposit, if made, will not be of any benefit of the defendant. The defendant will have to be treated defaulter in payment of rent for the period subsequent to the receipt of notice given by the landlord indicating his intention to receive the rent directly.;