RAMESH CHANDRA NATH Vs. SANTI CHEMICAL WORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against the order of the Small Cause Court Judge made on 16-8-1951 under Section 14 (4), Rent Act of 1950. The order that he made was in these terms:

(2.) It is said now on behalf of the petitioner-tenant that the order to deposit rev t was made on the basis of the contractual rent of Rs. 60/- per month including electricity. This, it is contended, is illegal, because in this particular case on 16-8-1951 when the Judge made the order there was a standard rent fixed by the Rent Controller at Rs. 21/4/-. It is, therefore contended that he should have required the tenant to deposit at the rate of this standard rent. It is the case of the petitioner that he had been depositing rent with the Rent Controller for at least ten months before the suit for ejectment by the opposite party was instituted.

(3.) In answer to this argument the learned Advocate on behalf of the opposite party contends that the language used in Section 14(4) of the Rent Act of 1950 is "to deposit month by month rent at a rate at which it was last paid". It is said that there is a distinction made throughout the Rent Act between "payment" and "deposit". That such a distinction is made in the Act in some of the sections there can be no doubt. The question, however, is, is that distinction to be applied in interpreting Section 14(4) of the Rent Act. It is contended, as the last payment was to the landlord, the rate of payment should be on the basis of Rs. 60/- per month.