SMT. SHAKUNTLA DEVI Vs. RAMJI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the landlord is directed against the order of the Appellate Authority passed under Section 15 (4) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short the Act) whereby the case has been remanded to the Rent Controller. The brief background of the case is as follows:

(2.) The petitioner-landlord filed an application under Section 13 of the Act against the present respondent-tenant seeking his eviction on various grounds including the one of non-payment of rent for sixteen months, i.e. from November 1, 1976 to February 28, 1978. While the proceedings in that application were pending the respondent. tenant on the first date of hearing i.e. December 20, 1977 not only tendered the rent in excess of the amount claimed by the petitioner but also paid the interest on the said amount alongwith the costs of the litigation. The petitioner declined to accept the amount tendered on the plea that the tender was not in accordance with the provisions of Section 13 (2) (1) of the Act. On this objection being raised, the question with regard to the validity of the "tender" was taken up as preliminary issue and the same issue having been decided in favour of the petitioner the eviction, of the respondent was ordered. This order it needs to be mentioned here that the other grounds pleaded by the petitioner and denied by the respondent were neither made the subject matter of any other issue nor were tried.

(3.) The respondent-tenant assailed this order of the Rent Controller before the Appellate Authority who as already indicated allowed the appeal in view of the judgment of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Sheo Narain v. Sher Singh 1980 RCJ 301, was based on a Bench Full decision of this Court in holding that even payment of excess amount to the one claimed as arrears of rent would not strictly amount to a valid tender or tender in accordance with law and was reversed. In a still later case which directly covers the point in issue, i.e. Mangat Ram and another v. Kidar Nath and others, 1980 AIR(SC) 1709 their Lordships of the Supreme Court have held that the amount tendered in excess of the arrears claimed by a tenant would not make a tender invalid. The question of validity of the tendered amount is thus no more a matter of controversy.