NASIB SINGH Vs. OM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent No. 1 filed a petition for the ejectment of the Petitioner on the grounds inter alia of non-payment of rent. He claimed that the rent of the premises in dispute had been fixed at Rs. 40.00 per month. The petitioner submitted a written statement in which he asserted that the premises in dispute carried a monthly rent of Rs. 22.00 per month. However, in order to save his interest, the petitioner tendered rent along with costs and interest etc. , at the rate of Rs. 40.00 per month. Thereafter the respondent made a petition be-fore the learned Rent Controller. wherein he submitted that the issue regarding the quantum of rent be struck off because he had already received the arrears of rent. The learned Rent Controller acceded to this prayer and struck off the relevant issue. While doing so he purported to rely upon a Single Bench decision of Delhi High Court in case Behari Lal v. Ajudhia Dass, 1970 Ren CJ 671.

(2.) IN this petition it has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner had asserted that the rent fixed was at the rate of Rs. 22.00 per month and he could not have been forced to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 40.00 per month without its being determined at that figure. On behalf of the respondent, it has been argued that since the petitioner did not tender rent at the rate of Rs. 40/per month under protest, it was not open to him to claim a decision on the issue relating to the quantum of rent.

(3.) THIS Proviso nowhere mentions that a tenant while making a tender of the rent should do so under protest. All that is required is that the tenant should pay the arrears of rent, interest and costs etc. on the first hearing of the application. This implies that even when there is a genuine dispute about the quantum of rent it is open to the tenant to make tender at the rate claimed by the landlord; but that tender does not debar him from claiming a. trial of the issue relating to the quantum of rent. Had it not been so an unscrupulous landlord would claim rent at a rate higher than at which it had been fixed, pocket the same when tendered on the first date of hearing, and then leave the tenant helpless.