(1.) This is an appeal arising out of the order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Delhi dated 19.02.2005 wherein the learned Additional District Judge has decreed the suit of the plaintiff in the sum of Rs. 83,522/- with pendente lite and future simple interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realisation of the said amount. The plaintiff was also awarded proportionate cost of the suit.
(2.) The brief facts of case of the plaintiff/respondent are that the plaintiff had given a flat on rent to the respondent bearing Flat No. 21/A-1, Azad Apartments, Shri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi vide lease deed executed between the parties which contained the terms and conditions agreed between the parties. The appellant has agreed to pay rent @ 4,300/- per month. From March 1993 to February 1995, the rate of rent was increased to Rs. 4700/-per month and from March 1995 onwards, the rent was agreed to be paid by the appellant @ Rs. 5600/- per month. The appellant also agreed to pay water and electricity charges separately to Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking respectively over and above the rent paid by him. The appellant/defendant also agreed to pay maintenance charges to the Co-operative Housing Society and he also agreed to pay the telephone bills to Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited. It was further agreed in the lease agreement that the defendant/tenant will give two months notice in case he desired to vacate the premises before expiry of the lease period. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant failed to pay the rent at enhanced rate for the period March 1993 to June 1993 and the rent from May 1994 onwards. The defendant vacated the premises in the first week of July 1995 and the keys of the premises were sent to the plaintiff on 04.07.1995. The plaintiff inspected the premises in question and found that the defendant had caused lot of damage to the premises. The plaintiff also found that the wash-basin of both the bathrooms were damaged, almirah in the kitchen was damaged, wooden ward-robes were also damaged, marble flooring in the kitchen as well as flooring in other rooms was also damaged very badly. As per the estimate got prepared by the plaintiff, it was assessed that Rs. 3,00,000/- would be required to repair the damage caused to the premises. The plaintiff got the premises repaired after spending Rs. 3,00,000/- on the same. The defendant has also failed to pay maintenance charges amounting to Rs. 6370/-to the Co-operative Group Housing Society. The defendant also did not pay Rs. 65,499/-against electricity bills to Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking besides telephone bills amounting to Rs. 1078/- to Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited. The plaintiff had to pay these bills to Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited to avoid the disconnection of the electricity and telephone connection. The defendant also did not give two months' notice to the plaintiff before vacating the premises and he is liable to pay Rs. 11,200/-in lieu of rent for the said period. The plaintiff filed the suit in the sum of Rs. 5,03,000/-against the defendant claiming interest @ 24% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realisation. The defendant filed his written statement and took preliminary objection that the suit was not signed, verified and instituted by a duly authorised person. On merits, the defendant has stated that as per the lease deed, he was let-out the premises for a period of four months only by registered lease deed w.e.f. 02.03.1995 to 02.07.1995. The defendant has denied that he has not paid the enhanced rent to the plaintiff. The defendant had taken the premises on rent for four months at monthly rent of Rs. 5600/-per month from 02.03.1995 to 02.07.1995 by a registered lease deed and nothing was due to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant. The defendant has further stated that he had paid the monthly rent and maintenance charges up to date and the receipt was issued by the Co-operative Group Housing Society in the month of June, 1995. The defendant has also denied that he had caused any damage to the suit property or that he is in arrears of electricity and telephone charges. The defendant also denied that he was required to serve two months' notice before vacating the premises or that he is liable to pay Rs. 11,200/- in lieu of that notice. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial court framed the following issues :
(3.) Whether the tenancy came to an end on 02.07.1995 and premises in dispute were handed over to plaintiff in damaged condition as detailed in paragraph 14 of the plaint. OPD