Tarun Chatterjee, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 31st of January, 2008 passed by a learned Judge of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in CM (Main) No. 50 of 2005 whereby an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution at the instance of the landlord/respondent was allowed and the order passed by the Additional Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi dated 5th of November, 2004 allowing the tenant's appeal and setting aside the order dated 18th of May, 2004 passed by the Rent Controller, Delhi was set aside whereby the High Court had allowed the application filed by the landlord/respondent under Section 15(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short 'the Act') and rejected the application for condonation of delay in depositing the rent under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, "the Code") of the tenant and consequent thereupon, the defence of the tenant was struck out.
(3.) The facts in brief are as follows: The landlord/respondent has filed an eviction petition in respect of Property No. 2076, Katra Roshan Dola, Kinari Bazaar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to 'premises in question') against the tenant/appellant inter alia on the grounds of non-payment of rent and subletting before the Rent Controller, Delhi. In the eviction petition, an order was passed under Section 15(1) of the Act by the Rent Controller, Delhi on 15th of March, 1989 directing the original appellant, Shanti Prasad Jain (since deceased) to pay or deposit rent @ Rs. 105/- per month with effect from 1st January, 1985 and to continue to pay or deposit at the said rate by 15th of each succeeding month. Shanti Prasad Jain died on 23rd of May, 1997. During his lifetime, there was no dispute that the rent was not regularly paid in compliance with the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller. One of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased tenant Shanti Prasad Jain namely, Sunil Kumar Jain, thereafter filed an application for impleadment in the aforesaid eviction petition in the year 1995 during the lifetime of Shanti Prasad Jain before the Rent Controller seeking impleadment on the ground that he was a member of the HUF of Shanti Prasad Jain and that he was running the business in the name and style of M/s Vardhman Jewels (India) as a member of the HUF and that he was not a sub-tenant in respect of the premises in question. This application was allowed by an order dated 1st of September, 1995 by the Rent Controller, Delhi. Against the aforesaid order, the landlord/respondent filed a Civil Revision Case No. 1043 of 1995 before the High Court at Delhi and the High Court had only stayed the eviction proceeding till the disposal of the Revision Case. It is not in dispute that after the death of Shanti Prasad Jain (since deceased), the rent was not deposited in compliance with the aforesaid order passed under Section 15(1) of the Act. The admitted position in respect of the deposit of rent and default and belated payment of rent was as follows: 1) Rent for the period from 23rd May, 1997 to August, 1999 was deposited on 2/9/1999. 2) Rent for the period from September, 1999 to September, 2000 was deposited on 27th of March, 2000. 3) Rent for the period from October, 2000 to March, 2003 was deposited on 27th of September, 2002. Be it mentioned here that deposit of rent for the period from October 2000 to March, 2003 was, however, made at the time when the respondent had already filed an application under Section 15(7) of the Act before the Rent Controller, Delhi for striking out the defence of the tenant. ;