ORDER Dixit C.J.-This revision petition has come up before us for hearing and disposal on a reference made by one of us because of conflicting views expressed by this Court in some decisions on the question whether the provisions of section 13 (6) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with regard to striking out of the defence are mandatory or whether they give discretion to the Court in the matter of striking out of the defence.

2. The petitioner-tenant's defence was struck out by the Civil Judge, Class II, Jabalpur, on his failure to deposit the arrears of rent within the specified time as required by section 13 of the Act. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the provisions of section 13 (6) of the Act are not mandatory and even when a tenant has failed to deposit or pay any amount as required by section 13, the Court has discretion to decide whether his defence against eviction should be struck out, and that the learned Civil Judge struck out the defence without applying his mind to the question whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the penalty of striking out of the defence should be imposed on him,