Back
J. J. MUNIR
Virendra Kumar Malik (Goyala) – Appellant
Versus
Brigadier Subhash Chnada Jauhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
J.J. Munir, J.
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.8.2021 passed by the District Judge, Meerut in S.C.C. Revision No. 12 of 2021, dismissing the said revision preferred by the petitioner-tenant and upholding the order of the Judge, Small Cause Court dated 16.3.2021 in S.C.C. Suit No. 78 of 2014, clarifying the position that the tenant's defence stood stuck off in terms of an earlier order passed by the Trial Court on 15.2.2021. Also, under challenge is a judgment and order dated 17.1.2022 passed by the District Judge, Meerut, dismissing S.C.C. Revision No. 19 of 2021 and affirming an order dated 31.8.2021 passed by the Judge, Small Cause Court, Meerut in S.C.C. Suit No. 78 of 2014. The latter orders of the Revisional Court and the Trial Court are a sequel to the two earlier orders, hereinabove mentioned, passed by the Revisional Court and the Trial Court.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of the motion to admit this petition to hearing.
3. According to the plaintiff-respondents (for short, 'the landlords'), the defendant-petitioner/tenant (for short, 'the tenant') is a tenant in a part o
Strict compliance with the deposit requirements under Order XV Rule 5 CPC is mandatory for tenants in eviction suits, and inconsistent conduct may not entitle them to relief.
The provisions of Order XV Rule 5 CPC regarding the deposit of rent are mandatory and must be strictly complied with, and any deposit not made in accordance with the rule cannot enure the benefit of ....
Point of Law : The provisions under Order XV Rule 5(2) provides a locus poenitentiae to the defaulting tenant to make a representation, which must be made within ten days of the first hearing or with....
Eviction suit – Power to strike off defence is considered to be discretionary which is to be exercised with circumspection but relaxation is reserved for a bonafide tenant and not as a matter of cour....
(1) Striking off defence of tenant – Striking off defence is a serious matter and ought not to be resorted to unless there is a clear case of deliberate default or contumacious conduct on part of ten....
The court held that excess rent payments negate claims of default, emphasizing judicial discretion in striking off defenses under Order XV Rule V of C.P.C.
Strict compliance with the requirements of Order XV Rule 5 CPC and the need for the tenant to deposit the monthly rent in the Court where the suit is filed.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
