DAYA SINGH Vs. BHAGWAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The material facts in the appeal are that the respondents are tenant in respect of a shop in Connaught Place on a rent of Rs. 90.53 per month. On 17th November, 1963 the appellant landlord served a notice on the respondents requiring them to pay arrears of rent for the period from September, 1962 to October, 1963. It is the admitted case of the parties that the said notice had not been complied with within the period of two months as required by clause (a) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 59 of 1958 therein referred to as the Act nor has the same been paid even by now.

(2.) On 8th April, 1969 the appellant landlord filed the petition for eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent and unlawful subletting, the grounds mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act. Since the eviction has been sought on the ground mentioned in clause (a) the controller was required by section 15 of the Act to pass an order for deposit of arrears and future rent. The appellant landlord, however, filed an application on 27th October, 1969 requesting the Controller to pass an order for payment of arears which were legally recoverable. On that date, it is not disputed, that the arrears only for the period from first April, 1969 were legally recoverable and the arrears for the previous period were barred by time and could not be recovered in a court of law. The respondents were, however, liable to pay future rent from the date of the order as provided by section 15 of the Act. The Controller allowed the said application and repelled the contention of the respondents that the notice of demand referred to above had exhausted itself and was not available to constitute a good cause of action for passing of an order under section 15(1) of the Act.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, the respondents filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which reversed the order and accepted the objection of the respondents that the notice relied upon by the appellant did not claim arrears of rent legally recoverable in the petition and as such could not form the basis of an order under section 15(1) of the Act. This order of the Tribunal has been challenged in this appeal.