SATISH CHANDRA, YASHODANANDAN
POORAN CHAND – Appellant
Versus
PRAVIN GUPTA – Respondent
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
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.