NIRMAL JERATH Vs. SADHU RAM SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against a decision of the Rent Control Tribunal passed in appeal against an order under Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The appellants are (1) Shrimali Nirmal Jerath, (2) Rnjeev Jerath, minor son of Shrimati Nirmal Jeraih, and (3) Shrimati Gian Devi, widow of Madan Gopal Jerath, and the premises are situated in House No. 34-E, Kamla Nagar, Delhi. In the ejectment application, out of which this appeal has arisen, the appellants were the applicants and Shrimati Shakuntala Jerath was joined as one of the respondents. The facts of the case show that the properly qua which ejectment was sought was let out by the late Sham Sunder Jerath to the tenants. Afier his death his mother, Shrimati Gian Devi, Shrimati Nirmal Jerath and his minor son Rajeev Jerath instituted this ejectment petition. The other widow did not join them and was impleaded as a respondent. The ejectment application was moved on various grounds including the non-payment of rent. The Additional Rent Controller passed an order on 5th January, 1971, under Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 slating that as there was a dispute between the parlies concerning the persons who were entitled to get the rent, hence the tenants should be directed to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 35.00 per month with effect from 1st February, 1968, but the rent should not be paid to the petitioners or respondent No. 3, who were the four heirs of the late Sham Sunder Jerath. This controversy arose thus. Petitioner No. 1 i.e., Shrimati Nirmal Jerath claimed that she was the widow along with respondent No. 3, Shrimati Shakuntala Jerath and the other heirs were the son and mother of the late Sham Sunder Jerath. On the other hand, respondent No. 3 claimed that she was the sole widow and also that she had received the rent. The Additional Rent Controller decided this controversy by directing the amount to be paid into Court without being paid to any of the parties.

(2.) An appeal was taken against this order to the Rent Control Tribunal. The Tribunal came to the conclusions that (a) as the rent had already been paid to Shrimati Shakuntala Devi according to the statement made hence no order should have been passed under section 15(1) of the Act as no rent was due and (b) it was held, that in any case, Shrimati Shakuntala Jerath had given a discharge concerning the rent and hence the tenants could not be expected to pay rent to different heirs and payment to one of the several heirs should be taken as discharge of the entire obligation to pay rent. in this respect, the Court based itself on a decision reported as Hirdlal Nekai v. Agarchand Gorelal. The applicants for ejectment have appealed to this Court under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. Along with this appeal I have heard S. A. 0. No. 259 of 1971 which relates to other premises in the same building and involves the same question.

(3.) The first question that requires consideration in this case is the legal position arising on the death of a landlord governed by Hindu Law. There are two possibilities in this case. Filstly, the late landlord, Sham Sunder Jerath died leaving only ore widow, Shrimati Shankuntala Jerath and of course his mother, Shrimati Gian Devi, who is the third appellant before me. The other possibility is that he died leaving two widows, a widow, mother and a minor son the two possibilities are that the deceased landlord left either four heirs or two heirs. In both situations, all the heirs would succeed to the property as tenants-in.common by virtue of section 19(b) of the Hindu Succession Act. 1956. The right of each one of these heirs, therefore, whether they were four or two, would be to receive rent for the premises in question. The tenants could not obtain a discharge regarding the payment of rent of the premises without obtaining a discharge from all the possible heirs. The fact that the tenants have obtained a discharge from one of the several heirs does not operate as a discharge of the rent payable to the other heir or heirs. In this connection, it is necessary row to refer to the definition of landlord' in the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The said definition is to be found in Section 2(e) of the Act. It reads as under : -