( 1 ) HEARD Sri Rajesh Tandon, senior Advocate along with Sri Som Narain mishra, Advocate on behalf of the petitioners (tenants) and sri R. B. Singhal, Advocate on behalf of the contesting respondents (landlord ).

( 2 ) ABOVE Writ Petitions have been listed, before us on a reference made by a learned single Judge. Referring order dated September 10, 2002 is extracted:"i have heard the learned counsel for both sides. Order 15, Rule 5, C. P. C. as added in U. P. requires that the tenant/defendant should deposit the arrears of rent which is admitted by him to be due with interest at the first hearing. He should also deposit future rent month to month during the pendency of the suit. Failing such deposit the defence in the suit is liable to be struck off. In this particular case, the tenant/petitioner in his written statement has denied the relationship of the landlord and tenant, and therefore obviously no rent could be said to be admittedly due. He did not deposit any amount towards rent. His defence was struck off on the finding that relationship of the landlord and tenant existed. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the clear words of Order 15, Rule 5 as interpreted by a