KAMLA L M HARVETTAKER Vs. M PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's second appeal against the judgment of the Rent Control Tribunal by which it passed an eviction order against the appellant from the premises in dispute under clause (a) to Proviso to Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (to be called the Act).

(2.) The respondent, Om Parkash, brought an application for eviction against the appellant from the premises in dispute. The grounds for eviction were non-payment of arrears of rent and also bona-fide requirement by the respondent-landlord owner as well as the substantial damage to the premises. The appellant resisted the application.

(3.) The Additional Rent Controller by his order dated 21st September, 1972 held that the respondent was the landlord owner of the premises and that the same had been let out for the residential purposes and were also required by the landlord for residence of self and the members of the family. He also found that as the appellant had not paid or tendered the arrears of rent for the month of February, 1971, as directed under Section 15(1), he was not, therefore, entitled to the benefit of Section 14(2) of the Act and he consequently directed the eviction of the appellant under clause (a) of proviso to Section 14(1) of the Act.