AERO TRADERS P LTD Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR SIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) These appeals, by special leave, have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 9-9-2003 of Delhi High Court by which the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1, Ravinder Kumar Suri, under Article 227 of the Constitution was allowed, the order dated 22-5-2001 of the Additional Rent Control Tribunal was set aside and the order dated 19-3-2001 of the Rent Controller was restored by which the defence of the appellant was struck off. By the same order the writ petition filed by the tenant-appellant was dismissed.

(3.) The appellant is a tenant of a commercial premises situate in Karol Bagh, New Delhi on a rental of Rs. 30/- per month. The landlord, Ravinder Kumar Suri, filed a petition for eviction of the appellant under Section 14(1)(a) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short "the Act") on the ground, inter alia, that the appellant was in arrears of rent. The Rent Controller passed an order under Section 15(1) of the Act on 20-12-1999 directing the appellant to deposit or pay to the landlord within one month the entire arrears of rent w.e.f. 1-6-1996 and to continue to pay the future rent by 15th of each succeeding month. The landlord (respondent No. 1) moved an application under Section 15(7) of the Act for striking off the defence of the appellant (tenant) on the ground that he did not comply with the order. The appellant claimed that he had complied with the order and had sent the rent by cheques but the landlord did not encash the same. The Rent Controller held that the appellant had neither paid the rent to the landlord nor had deposited the amount in Court. Accordingly, he passed an order on 19-3-2001 by which the application filed by the landlord was allowed and the defence of the appellant was struck off. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal which was disposed of by the judgment and order dated 22-5-2001 with a direction to the appellant to deposit the whole arrears of rent along with penalty of the same amount within 30 days, failing which his defence shall stand struck off as directed by the Rent Controller. The landlord challenged the order passed by the Rent Control Tribunal by filing a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Delhi High Court. The appellant also filed a petition for quashing of certain findings which were recorded against him by the Rent Controller. The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the landlord, set aside the order passed by the Rent Control Tribunal and restored that of the Rent Controller. The writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.