MELA RAM AND ORS. Vs. KUNDAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question for my decision in this case is what is the first date of hearing for the purposes of the proviso to Section 13(2)(i) of the Urban Rent Restriction Act of 1949.

(2.) IN this case summons were issued to the tenant in an application for ejectment for 14th December, 1957. One of the grounds upon which ejectment was sought was that arrears of rent had not been paid. On 14th December, 1957, the Respondent appeared and stated that he had not been given a copy of the application for ejectment. He prayed for an adjournment, and the case was adjourned to 30th December, 1957. A copy of the application was supplied to the Respondent on the same day i.e., 14th December, 1957.

(3.) THE Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority have held that 14th December, 1957, was not the first date of hearing, because on that date the Respondent had not been supplied with a copy of the application. Therefore, on that date the Rent Controller could not apply his mind to the case and thus hear it. On 30th December, 1957, which was the adjourned date, the tenant had been supplied with a copy of the application and so issues could be framed and the case could be heard. That, therefore, was the first date of hearing, and since on that date the necessary tender of arrears of rent was made, the landlords could not claim ejectment on this ground.