Hon’ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, J.—This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 15.5.2018 passed by the District Judge, Agra in SCC Revision No. 25 of 2017 and also the order dated 26.5.2017 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Agra in Misc. Case No. 20 of 2016. A further prayer has been made for this Court to issue a direction to allow the application Paper No. 4 Ga, 5 Ga and 11 Ga dated 31.5.2016 said to be pending before the Judge, Small Causes Court, Agra in Misc. Case No. 20 of 2016.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner, Mr. Manish Tandon, has argued that the petitioner is tenant of shop No. G-11 situated at ground floor of the premises, municipal number is 6/209, Bhairo Bazar, Agra.

3. SCC Suit No. 54 of 2015 was filed by the respondent No. 3 claiming herself to be owner and landlady of the property on the basis of a sale deed dated 30.8.2013 executed by the erstwhile owner. It was alleged in the plaint that the petitioner was tenant of the shop in question at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month initially, later on increased to Rs. 4,000/- per month and thereafter, to Rs. 4,500/- per month, which was allegedly paid till 31.3.2015. It was agreed upon orally between the petitioner-tenant and respondent-landlady that the tenant shall pay Rs. 5,000/- per month w.e.f. 1.4.2015 and also to vacate the premises in question on or before 31.3.2016. This promise was not kept by the tenant. It has been argued that no notice or summon was ever issued or received by the petitioner-tenant and the suit was decreed ex-parte by judgment and order dated 30.3.2016. A decree was prepared but no amount under the decree was mentioned by the learned Trial Court.

4. Execution Case No. 5 of 2016 was thereafter filed by the respondent-landlady and when the petitioner came to know of the decree dated 30.3.2016 she filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 20 of 2016. The petitioner also filed an application under Section 17 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887 making a prayer in the application that she may be permitted to deposit Rs. 10,100/- in compliance of Section 17 of the Act, 1887 and may further be allowed to furnish security for payment of rest of the decretal amount in case the same is disclosed as the decree is silent about the amount to be paid by the petitioner-tenant.

5. This application paper No. 11 Ga was disposed off by the Judge, Small Causes Court by passing an order on 31.5.2016 permitting the petitioner-tenant to deposit Rs. 10,100/- at her one risk. The petitioner deposited Rs. 10,100/- before the Court.

6. The Respondent No. 3 filed objection to the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure on 14.7.2016 saying that the proviso to Section 17 of the PSCC Act, 1887 was mandatory and the entire decretal amount should be deposited by the tenant before an application for recall can be entertained. The respondent’s husband is a senior advocate and a leading lawyer of the suit and he appeared as his wife’s counsel in the aforesaid matter. The petitioner-tenant gave him an amount of Rs. 75,000/- in cash which was accepted by him and in this regard an application paper No. 18 Ga was filed before the Trial Court on 4.8.2016 wherein the respondent’s husband made an endorsement that he had received Rs. 75,000/- from the tenant. The application paper No. 18 Ga remained pending.

7. Another application paper No. 22 Ga was also filed by the petitioner-tenant narrating the entire facts and making a prayer for disposal of the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. as necessary compliance of the proviso to Section 17 of the PSCC Act, 1887 has already been made by the petitioner. Till date no decree in terms of the judgment and order dated 30.3.2016 has been prepared.

8. Again an application paper No. 24-Ga was filed by the petitioner-tenant making a prayer for disposal of the earlier appli