- (1.) The respondents filed a suit for recovery of excessive amount of rent realised by the appellant-landlady. The learned lower appellate Court came to the conclusion that even though the rent was payable by the respondents for a period of 34 months. She had actually realised the rent for 44 mouths at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month. On this basis the lower appellate Court decreed the claim of the respondents for a sum of Rs. 595/-.
(2.) In this appeal by the landlady it has been argued that the rent had been recovered by her under the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, and that the period for filling suit for the excessive rent paid by them, under that Act, was only six months. The argument raised is that since tie suit was filed by the respondents beyond the period of six months, it should to held to to barred by time.
(3.) In the cross-objections the grievance made is that even though the rent note indicates that Rs. 50/- per month was the rent fixed and Rs. 10/- out of it would be allowed as rebate if the rent was paid regularly on the stipulated date, yet in spite of the defaults committed by the respondents, the rent at the rate of Rs. 40/- per month was accepted by the landlady on more than one occasion. The argument raised is that the short acceptance, of the rent by the landlady brought about a novation of the old contract.;