In Brief
A landlord sought to execute a decree for possession and rent against a tenant. The tenant had applied to set aside the ex parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, but did not comply with the mandatory requirement under Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 to deposit the full amount due. The Court held that compliance with this proviso is a mandatory precondition for entertaining such applications. Even assuming amounts deposited under the U.P. Urban Buildings Act were available, they were insufficient and could not substitute for the required deposit under Section 17. The tenant also failed to show sufficient cause for recall. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's interference and upheld the trial court's rejection of the tenant's application.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.