Pankaj Mithal, J. –

Heard Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-revisionists and Sri M.N. Maurya, learned counsel, holding brief of Sri Ramendra Asthana, who appears for the defendant-respondents.

2. In the suit of the plaintiff-revisionists for arrears of rent and eviction, the application filed under Order 15, Rule 5 of CPC has been rejected by the court below by the impugned order dated 16.09.2014.

3. The submission of Sri Atul Dayal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-revisionists is that even if the defendant-respondents denied the relationship of landlord and tenant or the title of the plaintiff-revisionists still they are liable to comply with the 2nd part of the Order 15, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to the State of U.P. regarding deposit of monthly amount due, failing which their defence is liable to be struck off.

4. The court below has refused to struck off the defence of the defendant-respondents for the reason that the defendant-respondents have denied the relationship of landlord and tenant and the stage has not come in the suit to decide about the said relationship.

5. Order 15, Rule 5 CPC applicable in the State of U.P. is in two p