IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4232 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 7.12.2010 Anita Kaul ......Petitioner(s) Versus Prafulit Kaul ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Sanjiv Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shekhar Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral) The petitioner filed a suit for possession by way of ejectment of respondent and recovery of mesne profits. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC for striking of defence of the respondent for non-payment of rent. The aforesaid application was rejected by the trial Court vide impugned order. It is relevant to mention that in the earlier pleadings, it was the stand taken by the respondent that he had made the payment of rent through post dated cheques which were not encashed by the petitioner whereas as per the stand taken by the petitioner, he never received those cheques. Be that as it may, the respondent has handed over a demand draft for a sum of Rs.5,02,047/- dated 3.12.2010 drawn on Axis Bank Limited to Sh. Shekhar Verma, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, a photocopy of which has been retained on the file. A sheet containing details of rent paid has also been attached. CR No.4232 of 2010(O&M) -2- According to counsel for the respondent, the upto date payment of rent till the month of October, 2010 has been made to the petitioner. The aforesaid payment of rent is subject to all the objections to be raised by the parties. In case still there remains any dispute regarding payment of rent, the petitioner shall be at liberty to give the details of any such dispute which shall be gone into by the trial Court. It is also noticed that in view of the stand taken by the parties, the aforesaid cheques, as alleged by the respondent, details of which have been given vide Annexure R-6 along with affidavit dated 27.10.2010 shall be deemed to be cancelled. In view of the payment made towards the arrears of rent, this revision does not survive. Disposed of. December 7, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE