O P BAHAL Vs. A K SHAROFF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent landlord filed a petition for eviction against the appellant tenant on the ground that the tenant had not paid arrears of rent from 17-12-1960. Clause (a) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) requires the landlord to serve a notice of demand for the arrears of rent on the tenant in the manner provided in section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the relevant part of which runs as follows:-

(2.) The landlord adopted all the three modes. Firstly, the notice of demand dated 11-12-1964 was sent to the tenant at the address of the premises in which he lived under a certificate of posting which is Exhibit A5. Secondly, it was sent by registered post. But the registered envelop was returned with remarks that nobody from inside gave a reply and, therefore, the cover was being returned. The cover was, however, returned on 21-12- 1964. But before the return, the registered letter was taken to the house of the tenant on the 15th, 16th and 17th of December 1964. As it could not be delivered to the addressee on the 17th December 1964, a copy of the notice was affixed by the landlord to the house of the tenant in the presence of the landlord's lawyer.

(3.) The Controller as well as the Rent Control Tribunal held that the notice of demand had been properly served. The petition for eviction was, therefore, in order under clause (a) of the A proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act, As the tenant had already enjoyed the benefit of section 14(2) of the Act, an order for eviction was passed by the Controller and was upheld by the Rent Control Tribunal.