SURESH KUMAR Vs. PREM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of learned trial Court by which it held that "the tender was short and this being so, the Court has no option but to struck (strike) off the defence of the defendant." A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondent is the owner of the premises in dispute. He let out the premises to the petitioner vide rent note dated 30/04/1982 at the rent of Rs. 8500.00 per six months. The tenant was also liable to pay the house tax and the water charges. The respondent claims that he terminated the tenancy of the petitioner by a registered notice dated 22/02/1990. In spite of that, the premises were not vacated. Accordingly, the respondent filed asuit on 16/12/1991 for a decree for the eviction of the petitioner from the premises and for recovery of the arrears of rent, mesne profits and damages along with interest etc. It is stated that the respondent claimed an amount of Rs. 53,000 / -.

(3.) Notice of the suit was given to the petitioner who appeared in Court on 6/02/1992. He tendered an amount of Rs. 48,151.15. A sum of Rs. 38,250.00 was tendered on account of arrears of rent for the period from Nov. 1,198 9/01/1992. An amount of Rs. 3729.34 was tendered by way of interest on the arrears of rent at the rate of 9 percent per annum. An amount of Rs. 5577.81 was tendered on account of house tax and a sum of Rs. 594.00 on account of the water charges. The respondent accepted this amount under protest. It was claimed that the tender was short. Accordingly, a prayer for striking off the defence of the defendant-petitioner was made. The learned trial Court found that there was no dispute regarding the amount of Rs. 38,250.00 paid on account of arrears of rent. However, it held that an amount of Rs. 4016.25 was due on account of interest on the arrears of rent while the petitioner had tendered only Rs. 3729.34. It further found that the petitioner had failed to pay interest on the amount of house tax and water charges. As a result, it came to the conclusion that the tender was short by Rs. 1159.71 No explanation having been given by the petitioner for failure to pay the actual amount which was due to the plaintif-respondent, the learned trial Court struck off the defence of the petitioner.