Back
SARAL SRIVASTAVA
Deepak Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Ramakant Dixit – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava, J.-Heard Sri Manish Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri Himanshu Raghav Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The petitioners are tenants and have filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 20.2.2019 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court, Kanpur Nagar in S.C.C. Case No. 225 of 2009 by which he has allowed the application 30-Ga of the respondent/landlord and struck off the defence of the petitioners and order dated 15.2.2021 passed by the Additional District Judge/F.T.C. (created by 14th Finance Commission), Kanpur Nagar dismissing the S.C.C. Revision No. 24 of 2019 preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 20.2.2019.
3. The facts in brief are that respondent/landlord instituted S.C.C. Case No. 225 of 2009 for eviction of the petitioners from house No. 15/280 Civil Lines, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'suit property') on the ground of default of payment in rent. In the said case, respondent/landlord filed an application 30-Ga under Order XV Rule V of C.P.C. contending inter alia that petitioners have defaulted in payment of rent due in each mont
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.
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....
The court emphasized that the discretionary power under Order XV Rule 5 of the CPC must be exercised judiciously, particularly in cases of non-payment of rent, reflecting the parties' conduct.
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....
Failure to regularly deposit admitted monthly rent under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC without timely representation constitutes deliberate defiance justifying striking off tenant's defence in eviction suit.
Striking out defence of defendant – Judicial discretion must not be exercised in favour of a party indulging in contumacious defiance.
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
