RADHABALLABHA AND ORS. Vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed against the judgment dated 25.11.2014, passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Kota directing the eviction of the petitioners -tenants (hereinafter "the tenants") from the tenanted premises and issuing a certificate of possession in favour of the respondent -landlord (hereinafter the landlord) while reversing the judgment dated 02.11.2011, passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota whereby the landlord's eviction petition on the ground of default as provided for under Section 9(a) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter "the Act of 2001") had been dismissed.

(2.) MR . Sanjay Singhal, appearing for the tenants has submitted that the ground of default under Section 9(a) of the Act of 2001 for eviction of the tenant was not made out in the instant case inasmuch as the purported arrears of rent payable to the landlord were sought to be related to revised rent payable by him under a judgment dated 12.05.2008 in eviction petition No. 361/2004, passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota in proceedings earlier taken by the landlord under Section 6 of the Act of 2001 for revision of rent. It has been submitted that vide its judgment, the Rent Tribunal, Kota had held that albeit the contracted rent was Rs. 910/ - per month, yet in terms of Section 6 of the Act of 2001, the landlord was entitled to revised rent @ Rs. 1,470/ - per month effective 01.04.2003. It has been submitted that consequent to the judgment dated 12.05.2008, passed by the Rent Tribunal in petition No. 361/2004, a sum of Rs. 38,745/ - was due to the landlord as of 30.04.2008. It has been submitted that vide notice dated 16.06.2008 compliant with the two provisos of Section 9(a) of the Act of 2001, the landlord sought the payment of the amounts due not for default simplicitor but for reason of arrears payable under the judgment dated 12.05.2008, passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota in eviction petition No. 361/2004. Counsel submitted that for a ground of default to be made out under Section 9(a) of the Act of 2001, the amounts of arrears of rent payable under the judgment dated 12.05.2008, passed by the Rent Tribunal on a petition for revision of rent were not reckonable as those amounts were constituted of arrears of rent due resulting from the revision of rent by the Rent Tribunal and not from the deliberate act of non -payment of rent due. Such amounts were recoverable by resort to Section 20 of the Act of 2001 in execution proceedings. It has been submitted that in respect of such amounts recoverable under Section 20 of the Act of 2001 following the judgment dated 12.05.2008, passed by the Rent Tribunal, the tenants could not be held to be in default. Counsel further submitted that even otherwise even prior to the receipt of the notice dated 16.06.2008, the tenants had deposited a sum of Rs. 5,000/ - on 02.06.2008 and a further sum of Rs. 30,000/ - on 18.06.2008 consequent to which they were, if at all, in default only of Rs. 1,870/ - which was also deposited on 28.07.2008. It has been submitted that in this view of the matter, the Rent Tribunal had correctly appreciated the facts of the case and held the tenants not in default leading to the dismissal of the landlord's eviction petition. Counsel finally submitted that the Appellate Tribunal has erred in treating the amounts recoverable under the judgment dated 21.05.2008, passed by the Rent Tribunal, Kota in a petition No. 361/2004 for revision of rent, as arrears of rent due for a period of four months, nonpayment of the whole whereof would entail the tenants' eviction for default in payment of rent under Section 9(a) of the Act of 2001.

(3.) HEARD the counsel for the tenants and the landlord.