SHRI SHAM SUNDER Vs. SHRI NAND LAL PUJARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sham Sunder Kumar, appellant herein, is a tenant of premises situate in Rana Partap Bagh, Delhi under the respondent. The rent agreed was Rs. 180 per month, besides the electricity and water charges. On 25th September, 1971, the tenant filed a petition under Sections 6, and 9 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter called the "Act") for fixation of standard rent. On 15th February, 1972, the landlord filed a petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act for eviction of the tenant on the ground that he required the premises bonafide for his personal use. On 28th April, 1972, the landlord filed an application under Section 15(2) of the Act for an order on the tenant to pay the arrears of rent. It is not disputed that the tenant has not paid any rent to the landlord since 1st July, 1971. On 10th July, 1972 the Additional Rent Controller passed an order under Section 15(2) fixing the interim rent at the agreed rent. The tenant was directed to pay the arrears of rent within one month and the future rent at the agreed rate by the 15th of every month. The tenant filed an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal against the order of the Controller dated 10th July, 1972. This appeal was rejected on 24th March, 1973.

(2.) Now reverting to the application filed by the tenant for fixation of standard rent, the Additional Rent Controller made an order on 2nd November, 1972 fixing the interim rent at Rs. 180 per month and further observed that the said interim rent shall prevail till 13th March, 1974. Against the order dated 2nd November, 1972, the tenant went in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal on 24th March, 1973 set aside the order of the Controller dated 2nd November, 1972 and remanded the case for a fresh decision by 30th April, 1973. It appears that no decision has been made so far on the application under Section 10.

(3.) Shri Gopal Narain Aggarwal, on behalf of the appellant, contended that the tenant had filed the application for fixation of standard rent and the application under Section 10 for fixation of interim rent before the landlord filed the application under Section 1 and the Controller should have first dealt with the application under Section 10 and then made an order on the application under Section 15(2).