SIRI PAL JAIN Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal arising out of an order passed u/s 15 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Brief facts are :

(2.) On 20th October, 1969, the respondent, Smt. Raj Rani, filed an application for eviction of the tenant appellant, Siri Pal Jain. In the said application it was alleged that the tenant was in occupation of the premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 30 that a decree for Rs. 270 towards the rent for the period 1st February, 1967 to 31st October, 1967 had been passed by the Additional Judge Small Cause Court, Delhi on 27th August, 1968; further besides this decretal amount, rent w.e.f 1st November, 1967 was also due and the tenant-appellant had not paid it in spite of service of the notice of demand. An ex-parte decree was passed on 17th December, 1969. An application for setting aside the ex parte decree was dismissed by the Additional Rent Controller on 10th August, 1970. Thereafter, the respondent-landlady took actual possession of the premises on 3rd September, 1970 in execution of the decree passed in her favour. The said ex parte decree dated 17th December 1969 was, however, set aside in appeal by the Rent Control Tribunal on 17th November, 1971. Thereafter, a written statement was filed on 25th April, 1972 by the tenant- appellant, but no plea of suspension of rent was raised. On 15th July, 1972 the Controller, Delhi, passed an order u/s 15 of the said Act directing the tenant appellant to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 30 per month for the period 1st February, 1967 to 3rd September, 1970. He also allowed adjustment of arrears of rent which had already been deposited in court. The tenant-appellant being aggrieved by this order filed an appeal under Section 38 of the said Act on 31st August, 1972. Thereafter on 26th September, 1972, the tenant-appellant filed an application for restitution of possession of the premises. This application I am informed is still pending. The Rent Control Tribunal by its order dated 18th December, 1972 modified the order of the Controller dated 15th July, 1972 to the extent that it directed the tenant-appellant to deposit arrears of rent at the reduced rate of Rs. 15 per month w.e.f 1st November, 1967 to 2nd September 1970 within a month of this order. The order was made without prejudice to the final decision regarding the rate of rent. The tenant, still not being satisfied with the order, appealed under Section 39 of the said Act to this Court. The landlady did not file any cross appeal. I am informed, however, that some time before July, 1973 the tenant-appellant deposited the amount of arrears of rent and this was withdrawn by the landlady respondent.

(3.) On the basis of these facts learned counsel for the appellant has urged that since the tenant is out of possession since 3rd November, 1970 the order dated 15th July, 1972 for deposit of rent from 1st November, 1967 to 3rd September, 1970 is without jurisdiction, as according to him an order under Section 15 of the said Act can only be passed if three conditions are satisfied : (1) that a petition for eviction has been filed u/s 14 : (2) that the relationship of landlord and tenant subsists, and (3) that proceedings for recovery of possession are in existence. It is also contended that unless and until possession is restored to the tenant, the entire payment of rent is suspended. In support of the above proposition learned counsel has cited Rajinder Prasad v. Suraj Mal etc. 1972 Rajdhani Law Reporter 146 and N.K.Baslas v. Kishan La I, 1973 Rajdhani Lal Reporter 14.