D.K. Kapur, J. - (1.) This appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 is by the tenant. The appeal arises of an application for eviction brought on the ground of non-payment of rent. The landlord, Rai Singh Kain, has succeeded both before the Rent Controller as well as the Rent Control Tribunal. The decision has been given on the basis that the tenant, Shrimati Rama Gupta had previsously avoiled ejectment by depositing the rent in court, and hence she was not entitled to get that benefit again. In other words, the decision is based on the proviso to Section 14 (2) of the Act. The tenant has now appealed to this Court.
(2.) . A very simple question arises for decision in this case namely : did the tenant get any benefit under Section 14 (2) of the Act in a previous eviction case based on the ground of non-payment of rent? The facts of the case may now be set out The previous application for eviction under the Act was" brought on the ground of non-payment of rent as well as on the ground of bonafide personal requirement. In those proceedings an order directing the deposit of arrears of rent was passed. The tenant contested the case on the ground that the standard rent was Rs. 14.00, as against the contractual rent of Rs. 50.00, hence she did not make any deposit and her defence was struck out. Subsequently, an order for eviction was also passed against heron both grounds of ejectment. She filed two appeals to the Rent Control Tribunal which were accepted by Shri Pritam Singh Pattar the then Rent Control Tribunal, who remanded the case back to the Controller with a direction to him to re-decide the case on merits after passing a fresh order under Section 15 (3) of the Act. After remand the Additional Rent Controller again passed an order on 15th January, 1^63 directing the deposit of arrears of rent and the future rent at the rate of Rs. 50.00per month. An appeal was taken against this order, which was accepted by the Rent Control Tribunal on 15th March, 1963, and the tenant was directed to deposit arrears of rent at the interim rate of Rs. 30.00per month with effect from 4th august, 1960 upto-date within one month.
(3.) . On 29th April, 1964 a statement was made by the counsel for the landlord before the Controller, withdrawing the eviction petition and the following order was passed:- "In accordance with the statement of the counsel for the petitioner, the application stands dismissed. The amount deposited by respondent be paid to the petitioner subject to adjustment on fixation of standard rent. Parties shall bear their own costs. sd/- Sudarshan Aggarwal, A.R.C. Delhi." It appears that after this order the tenant again did not pay the rent to the landlord and hence a notice of demand dated 20th July, 1964 was sent to her claiming Rs 570.00as arrears of rent calculated at the interim rate of Rs. 30/per month. This was not complied with and hence the present eviction petition on the ground of non-payment of rent was instituted on 6th October, 1966. In this petition it was stated that the tenant had not complied with the demand for rent made on 27th December, 1964 and she was not entitled to protection under the Act because of the proviso to section 14(2) of the Act The tenant contested this and also claimed that a receipt Exhibit R-1 had been issued by the landlord relating to the rent up to October 1966. This receipt is for Rs. 339.48 and states that the payment is for rent for ten months of 1956 plus electric charges for the bill of August 1966 paid in the month of October 1966 and now rent is to be paid for the month of November 1966. This receipt has not been accepted as genuine by both the Controller and the Tribunal.;