SUNDER KRISHAN Vs. MURARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for brevity 'the Act') challenges order dated 18.4.1984 passed by the Appellate Authority, Narnaul accepting the appeal of the tenant respondent in which the order dated 8.2.1984 passed by the Rent Controller, Narnaul was challenged. The Rent Controller has allowed the application of the landlord-petitioner on the ground that tender of rent by him was not valid and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Section 13(2) of the Act, the tenant respondent was liable to be ejected.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the present petition are that the tenant-respondent was inducted in the demised premises as tenant @ Rs. 50/- per month vide rent deed dated 5.3.1966. The shop in dispute fell to the share of the landlord-petitioner and his brother one Kunj Lal, who is respondent No. 2 in the present proceedings. Both of them became the landlords of the demised premises in view of the family settlement arrived at between the members of the family. The landlord-petitioner filed ejectment petition of the tenant-respondent on 21.1.1982 alleging that the tenant-respondent has not paid rent from 1.5.1979 to 31.12.1981. Further allegations with regard to non-payment of house tax etc. were also levelled. The tenant-respondent tendered the arrears of rent representing the period from 1.5.1979 to 31.12.1981 for a period of 31 months which includes the payment of house tax, costs, and interest. The total amount paid was Rs. 1,991/-. The Rent Controller allowed the ejectment petition by concluding that the tendered amount by the tenant-respondent was not valid because the rent was required to be paid for 32 months and not for 31 months. Consequently, he found that the tender of rent was short by one month and ordered the ejectment of the tenant-respondent on that basis.

(3.) I have heard Shri Anil Rathee, learned counsel for the landlord-petitioner and Shri O.P. Goyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Sunil Rana, Advocate, for the tenant-respondents.