AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sudhir Agarwal, J.
Petitioner''s defence has been struck off for noncompliance of provisions of Order 15 Rule 5 C. P. C. by the Court of Small Cause, Bijnor vide order dated 18. 01. 2012 and the said order has been confirmed by Revisional Court vide judgment dated 09. 08. 2012. Aggrieved by these two orders the petitioner has come to this Court.
Both the courts below have clearly found that there is no compliance of Order 15 Rule 5 C. P. C. and the suit was filed by plaintifflandlord by clearly showing that U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafJer referred to as the "Act, 1972") is not applicable to premises in dispute. Both the courts below have also considered various authorities of this Court holding that after notice received by tenant, no payment can be deposited even otherwise under Section 30(1) of Act, 1972 and any such payment madewould not ensure any benefit to tenant for the purpose of looking into whether requirement of Order 15 Rule 5 C. P. C. has been observed or not. It is also not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that requirement of Order 15 Rule 5 C. P. C. is mandatory.
In the circumstances, I find no error apparent on the face of record warranting interference in the impugned orders. Dismissed.