MAHENDRA PRATAP GARG Vs. SMT. VIJAY LAXMI GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant-tenant's revision. At the hearing of this revision before a learned Single Judge it was submitted on behalf of the tenant-applicant that the deposit made by him under Section 20(4) of the Rent Control Act of 1972 was an unconditional deposit. The Court below erred in law in holding to contrary. The learned Single Judge found some inconsistency between two Single Judge decisions of this Court, namely, Ram Kishan s case,1976 AllLJ 763 and Laxmi Narain's case, 1981 Alld. Rent Cases 762 on the nature of the deposit being conditional or unconditional. He hence referred this case to a Division Bench.

(2.) The plaintiff-opposite party sued for the ejectment of the tenant-applicant. She alleged that the defendant was a tenant of a portion of the accommodation on a monthly rent of Rs. 360/-. He had not paid the rent ever since August 1, 1972. The suit was filed on August 6, 1973 for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent and damages.

(3.) In defence it pleaded that the agreed rate of rent was Rs. 125/- only and that the defendant was the tenant of a larger portion than acknowledged by the plaintiff in the plaint. Many other pleas were taken which are not material relevant for our purposes.