B P N SHRIVASTAVA Vs. POORI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common question of law that arises for determination in the two appeals is the construction to be placed on the words,

(2.) ln S.A.O No.l39 of 1973 the Rent Control Tribunal confirmed the order of the Rent Controller directing eviction of the tenant. The Rent Controller had, inter alia, held that in as much as the tenant had not complied with the order passed under Section 15(3) of the Act, he was not entitled to the benefit of Section 14(2) of the said Act. The Rent Control Tribunal had upheld that decision. The order under Section 15(3) of the Act had been made by the Rent Controller on November 3, 1970 directing the tenant to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 175.00 P.M. with effect from January 10, 1970 upto dale within one month of the order and to deposit future rent at the rate of Rs. 175.00 P.M., month by month by the fifteenth of each succeeding month. Admittedly, the tenancy in the case was a monthly tenancy commoncing from the 10th of the month to the 9th of the next month according to the British Calendar. The tenant deposited the arrears of rent for the period January 10, 1970 to November 9, 1970 on November 28, 1970. There after the tenant deposited the rent month by month, admittedly, within time No rent was deposited for the period January 10, 1972 to February 9, 1972 as the tenant claimed that one month's rent had been spent on repairs and he was entitled to adjust the same towards rent. For the period February 10, 1972 to March 9, 1972 a deposit was made on March 15, 1972 and for the period March 10, 1972 to April 9, 1972 aeposit was made on April 15, 1972. Similarly, for the period April 10, 1972 to May 9, 1972 deposit was made on May 15, 1972. The Rent Control Tribunal held that there was no evidence to show that the tenant had spent Rs. 175.00 towards repairs and so, he could not claim adjust ment. In as much as no rent was deposited for the period January 10, 1972 to February 9, 1972 within 15 days of February 9, 1972 there was a default and the subsequent deposits, if taken to be deposits for the tenancy month of January 10, 1972 to February 9, 1972 and thereafter would all be regarded as made beyond 15 days and in consequence rendering the tenant liable to eviction for default in depositing the rent in accordance with the provisions of Section 15(1) of the Act. The Rent Control Tribunal negatived the contention that the word "month" meant British Calendar month and so, on a true construction of Section 15(1) of the Act the rent for the period January 10,1972 to February 9, 1972 had to be made by April 15, 1972.

(3.) In S.A.O. No. 46 of 1978 also the Rent Control Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Rent Controller on a similar default, said to have been committed by the tenant. In this case the monthly tenancy was from 17th of the month to the 16th of the succeeding month. An order under Section 15(1) of the Act had been made on January 3, 1974 directing the tenant to deposit the entire arrears of rent with effect from April 17, 1973 upto date and thereafter monthly rent, month by month, by the fifteenth of each succeeding month. The tenant deposited arrears of rent and continued to deposit rent month by month for some time. For the period November 17,1973 to December 16.1973 he deposited rent on February 1, 1974 and for the period November 17, 1974 to December 16, 1974 he deposited rent on January 16, 1975. For the period December 17, 1974 to January 16, 1975 be deposited rent on February 13 1975. In view of these three defaults it was held that the protection of Section 14(3) of the Act was not available to the tenant and he was liable to eviction.