BALA SAHAB Vs. YUGALKISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is filed by the defendant under section 23(e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act challenging the order dated 27.6.2002 whereby the Rent Controlling Authority has struck out the defence of the petitioner. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is a tenant of respondent paying rent at the rate of Rs. 11/ - per month. A suit was filed by the respondent landlord on 3.10.1998 on the ground of his personal requirements. During pendency of this suit, the petitioner deposited Rs. 22/ - on 9.12.1998 and thereafter deposited Rs. 132/ - every year i.e. Rs. 132/ - on 27.10.1999, Rs. 132/ -on 11.12.2000, Rs. 132/ - 11.12.2001 and Rs. 132/ - on 13.12.2001. Thus, the petitioner has deposited entire rent upto Dce. 2002.

(2.) THE contention of learned counsel that inspite of the fact that he was regularly depositing the rent, the Rent Controlling Authority has struck down his defence. According to him he has filed an application for condonation of delay, if any, in payment of rent. Counsel for petitioner submits that even if there is some default that may be due to some calculation mistake. But since he has deposited the entire rent the Rent Controlling Authority should have condoned the delay and should not have taken the extreme step of striking out his defence. For this purpose learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court reported in AIR I 992 (1) SCC 369 and AIR 2002(3) SCC 1998. According to him since he is not a wilful defaulter the Rent Controlling Authority has acted without jurisdiction in striking out his defence.

(3.) THUS , according to me Rent Controlling Authority has committed material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction in striking out the defence of the petitioner. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside. I am told by the parties that the evidence in the case is already over and only final arguments are to be heard. In such circumstances, I direct the Rent Controlling Authority to dispose of the main suit itself within a period of one month from the date of service of the order. Thus, this revision stands allowed with no orders as to costs.