DEV KARAN DASS Vs. HANUMAN PARSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant - petitioner has filed this revision against the order of the Appellate Authority, Narnaul, dated 2nd February, 1979, whereby the order of the Rent Controller ordering his ejectment was maintained.

(2.) The only ground on which the ejectment of the tenant - petitioner was sought was the non-payment of rent from 1st October, 1976 to 31st October, 1977. The ejectment petition was filed on 2nd December, 1977. The notice was issued for 6th January, 1978, when the learned Rent Controller assessed the rent amounting to Rs, 156/- at the rate of Rs. 12/- per month from 1st October, 1976 to 31st October, 1977, Rs. 7.28 interest thereon and Rs. 30/- were assessed as costs. Thus the total amount came to Rs. 19,328. According to the provision of section 13(2 (i) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the arrears of rent could be paid or tendered within a period of fifteen days of the first hearing of application for ejectment after due service. From 6th January, 1978, the case was adjourned to 20th January, 1978, for filing the written statement. On that date the Presiding Officer was on leave and therefore, the case was adjourned by the Reader for 24th January, 1978, for proper orders. On 20th January, 1978, an application was made on behalf of the tenant that he is prepared to tender the arrears of rent assessed by the Rent Controller on 6th January, 1978, and the same be got deposited from him. Since the Presiding Officer was on leave on that day, the Reader passed an order that it be placed on record. As stated earlier, the case was adjourned from 20th January, 1978 to 24th January, 1978, when it was again adjourned to 27th January, 1978, as on that date also the Presiding Officer was on tour. Thus the actual tender could be made on 27th January, 1978, when the Presiding Officer was available. But on that date, the learned counsel representing the landlord declined to accept the amount on the ground that the tender was not made within a period of 15 days as required under the statute. The Rent Controller framed the following issue :

(3.) The learned Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the tenant was a defaulter in payment of arrears of rent within the time prescribed and therefore, was liable to ejectment. In appeal this finding of the learned Rent Controller has been affirmed by the Appellate Authority. Feeling aggrieved against this, the tenant has come up in revision to this Court.