ASHOK KUMAR Vs. PREM LATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the concurrent orders of the courts below; of the Additional Rent Controller dated 11.4.2012 and the Rent Control Tribunal dated 10.9.2012; by which the defence of the petitioner/tenant stands struck off under Section 15(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for non-compliance of the order of pendente-lite deposit of rent passed on 9.11.2011.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner/tenant in terms of the order dated 9.11.2011 passed under Section 15(1) of the Act was directed to pay rent at Rs.1,650/- per month from 1.7.2007 after giving adjustment of amount already paid, but, petitioner/tenant admittedly did not pay the amount and simply pleaded that non-payment was on account of the sickness of the sister of the petitioner who is said to have died later and consequent financial constraints and hence the defence be not struck off. The fact of the matter is that default persisted even after filing of the application seeking striking off the defence and the default even continues till date and before this Court only an opportunity is prayed for to make compliance of the order of deposit of rent dated 9.11.2011.

(3.) No doubt, illness in anyone's family is a sad thing, however, there is no law that if a tenant has financial constraints, he need not comply with the orders of deposit of rent passed under Section 15(1) of the Act. This is because surely, the landlords are entitled to the rent which they have to receive for the premises which are owned by them and let out to the tenants, and financial constraints of tenants have never been held by even a single judgment of any Court to be a ground for continuous default in payment of the rent.