NAZUNUDDHIN AHMED Vs. K NARASIMHA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant is the revision petitioner. THE Rent controller passed an order of eviction against the tenant on the petition filed by the landlord and that order has been confirmed by the appellate authority. Against that the tenant has filed this civil revision petition.

(2.) THE landlord filed the eviction petition on the ground that the tenant failed to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 150 per mensem from July, 1990 to November, 1990 and this was inspite of a notice issued by the landlord dated 16. 11. 1990 calling upon the tenant to vacate the premises, and therefore there was wilful default in payment of rent.

(3.) THIS section makes it very clear that any amount paid by the tenant in excess of the agreed rent and one month advance if stipulated by the landlord shall be refunded by the landlord to the tenant. Thus, there is a mandate of law to the landlord to refund that amount even though the tenant has not asked for that. But an option is given to the tenant to tell the landlord to adjust that amount towards rent and that the landlord shall do.