B.R.ARORA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated January 3, 1992, passed by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar, by which the learned Additional District Judge allowed the application dated September 4, 1991, filed by the plaintiff' and ordered for the striking of the defence under Section 13(5) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act (for short, 'the Act').
(2.) PLAINTIFF Prem Kumar filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent against the defendant in respect of the shop No. 7 situated in Patel Market, Sri Ganganagar. The learned trial Court, by its order dated May 9, 1991, determined the provisional rent and directed the defendant -tenant to pay an amount of Rs. 16,800/ - as arrears of rent for a period from 22.7.89 to 21.4.91, alongwlth interest @ 6% per annum amounting to Rs. 840/ -. The defendant deposited the provisional rent determined by the trial Court but did not deposit the monthly rent by 15th of each subsequent month. The amount of rent for the period from 22.4.91 to 21.5.91 was deposited on 10.6.91 and for the period from 22.5.91 to 21.6.91 was deposited on 13.7.91. As the rent was not deposited by 15th of these two subsequent months and, therefore, an application under Section 13(5) of the Act was moved by the plaintiff for striking out of the defence of the defendant. This application was opposed by the defendant. The learned trial Court, by his order dated 3.1.92, allowed the application filed by the plaintiff and struck out the defence under Section 13(5) of the Act. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed by the defendant -appellants. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the learned lower Court while passing the order has not considered the fact whether the defence under Section 13(5) of the Act should be struck -out or not. His further submission is that Section 13(4) of the Act nowhere requires that the rent should be deposited within 15 days of the expiry of the month of tenancy but that 15 days means the 15th day of the succeeding month, namely, the calendar month and within that period, the amount of the rent was deposited and as such no defence could be struckout. It is further contended by the. learned Counsel for the appellants that striking out of the defence is a question of discretion and not of jurisdiction and, therefore, the learned lower Court should have considered that aspect of the case, also, and should not have struck -out the defence. Lastly, the learned Counsel for the appellants submits that he has moved an application for the extension of the time and the time may be extended for depositing the amount and the amount to be deposited may be treated within the time/limitation. The learned Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has supported the order passed by the Court below.
(3.) I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties.;