PRUTHI BROS Vs. MANGAL WATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the tenants, since June 20, 1950, in the first floor of a house situated on Original Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, belonging to the respondent, landlady. The agreed rent was Rs. 325.00 per mensem which they started paying to the landlady from the very beginning. They however, failed to pay the rent from April, 1962. On September 11, 1962 the respondent landlady filed her first application for the appellant's eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent in spite of notice of demand. The appellants in their written statement pleaded that the rent paid by them included house tax which the respondent could not recover under the law and was liable to refund to them. An order under section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, hereinafter called "the Act", was however passed by the Additional Controller directing the appellant tenants to deposit the arrears of rent with effect from April 1, 1962 onwards at the rate of Rs. 325.00 per month without prejudice to their pleas. The appellant tenants' appeal against the said order was dismissed. The arrears of rent were then deposited by the appellants in compliance with the aforesaid order. There was however, no progress in the case for one reason or the other, till it was fixed for evidence on September 13, 1963. The appellants failed to put in appearance on that day although the respondent land-lady was duly represented by her counsel. The latter made a statement that the rent deposited, having been withdrawn by the respondent the eviction Application had become infructuous. The Additional Controller made order on that very date that the tenants having failed to put in appearance their pleas .could not be gone into. The rent having been deposited in compliance with the orders of the Tribunal the eviction application was dismissed.

(2.) The appellants again failed to pay any rent and the rent for October, November and December, 1963 and January, 1964 fell into arrears. The landlady served a notice of demand Exhibit A.W. 1/6 dated February 12, 1964 on the appellants demanding rent at the rate of Rs. 325.00 per month for the said four months and "fire and scavanging tax" from 1960 to 1963 amounting to Rs. 158.10 paise. On April 27, 1964 the appellants sent a reply Exhibit A.W. 1/13 complaining that the repair charges at the rate of one month's rent in a year had not been paid by the respondent-landlady to them for 1961, 1962 and 1963. They asked her to adjust the same against the rent claimed. The liability to pay fire and scavanging tax was denied. The respondent was asked to confirm, if the arrears of rent after making the said adjustment be sent. No payment, however, was made.

(3.) On May 5, 1964 the respondent-landlady filed her second eviction application against the appellants on the ground of non-payment of rent. It was stated that the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of section 14 (2) of the Act as having obtained such benefit once they had committed this second default in the payment of rent. They were, therefore, said to be liable to be evicted. In the written statement the appellants denied having committed default. They disputed their liability to pay house tax or any other tax and asserted that they were entitled to adjust one month's rent in a year for repairs to the premises.