MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. APPELLATE RENT TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 10.05.2019, who has thereby dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant and upheld the judgement of the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Ajmer dated 21.12.2009 and that of Rent Tribunal dated 21.04.2007.

(2.) While the appellant is a tenant in the two shops situated at A.M.C. No.7/2010, Sardar Patel Marg, Ajmer, the respondent nos.3 to 6 are his landlords. The appellant had taken these shops on rent on 10.10.2001 and a rent note was executed thereabout. The respondents-landlord filed a petition under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2001') before the Rent Tribunal, Ajmer for eviction of appellant on the ground of default in payment of rent from 1.7.2005 to 31.10.2005. The respondents-landlord sent a registered notice to the appellant-tenant on 3.11.2005, which he received on 5.11.2005, but he failed to deposit the rent in the bank account of the respondents-landlord, within 30 days from the date of notice. The appellant-tenant sent a notice to the respondents-landlord on 9.1.2006, which they received on 14.1.2006 mentioning therein that he has deposited a sum of Rs.44,390/- as the rent for the month of July to September, 2005 @ Rs.7245/- per month and a sum of Rs.7475 for the month of October and a sum of Rs.7590/- for the month of November and December, 2005 each on 12.12.2005 vide cheque. According to the respondents-landlord, however, there was a default in payment of rent for more than 4 months after the period of notice of 30 days in terms of Section 9 of the Act of 2001. The appellant- tenant contested the case of the respondent-landlord saying that (3 of 14) [SAW-853/2019] bank account number of the respondent was not mentioned in the notice and therefore the mandatory provisions of the Act were not complied with and so soon the bank account number was sent to him, he deposited the rent in the account of the respondents- landlord on the very next date. He has thus not committed any default.

(3.) The Rent Tribunal vide order dated 21.04.2007 recorded a finding that the appellant-tenant has committed a default in terms of Section 9(a) of the Act of 2001 and therefore directed his eviction. The appellant challenged the aforesaid judgement before the Appellate Rent Tribunal by filing the appeal, which however dismissed the appeal vide order dated 21.12.2009. The appellant then filed the writ petition styled as petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order has dismissed the writ petition with costs of Rs.25,000 to be paid to the respondent.