SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(All) 437

SATISH CHANDRA, YASHODANANDAN
POORAN CHAND – Appellant
Versus
PRAVIN GUPTA – Respondent


SATISH CHANDRA, C. J.

A learned Single Judge has referred this case to a Division Bench because he found conflict of opinion in this Court amongst single Judges. The question is whether the Court has discretion not to strike off the defense in case the tenant has made default in depositing the rent and has failed to make any representation within the prescribed time. In Mathura Prasad v. Vikramajit Singh (1978 A. W. C. 523), a learned Singh Judge held that the Court has discretion to strike off the defense if the circumstances so demand. On the other hand, in Mrs. S. Abel v. District Judge and others (A. I. R. 1980 Alld. 302.) another learned Single Judge held that under order XV, Rule 5 C. P. C. if the tenant has defaulted and has made no representation the Court has no option but to pass an order striking off the defense.

In the present case, the defendant tenant admittedly committed default in depositing the rent at least for the month of September, 1977 which should have been deposited within time, that is to say by October 7,1977. It is further undisputed that the tenant did not make any representation for con doning the delay.

Order XV, Rule 5 C. P. C. was first enacted by th























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top