LOK NATH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the impugned order of the Additional Rent Control Tribunal dated 17.1.2012. The Additional Rent Control Tribunal by the impugned judgment has decided two appeals. One appeal was filed by the landlords and the other appeal was by the tenant both against the judgment/order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 09.11.2009. The judgment/order dated 09.11.2009 is a consequential order pursuant to the main judgment deciding the petition filed by the petitioners/landlords under Section 14(1)(a) (non-payment of rent) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 on 01.8.2008.

(2.) To put in seriatim and chronologically, it is to be noted that the petitioners herein/landlords filed the eviction petition on the ground of nonpayment of rent under Section 14(1)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. This petition was allowed in favour of the landlords by holding that the respondent/tenant had committed a default in payment of rent for the period from 01.10.1996 to 03.11.1996 by not paying, tendering or depositing the rent inspite of service of the legal notice Ex. AW-1/10 dated 12.12.1996. In law, even if a default is proved in a petition under Section 14(1)(a) of the Act, an eviction order does not follow because a tenant is entitled to make up the default of rent by depositing rent pursuant to an order under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. If it is found that the tenant has complied with the order passed under Section 15(1) of the Act, benefit of Section 14(2) of the Act is given and eviction order is not passed.

(3.) In the present case, the issue which is argued before this Court is that the respondent/tenant has not complied with the order under Section 15(1) of the Act because interest amount which was liable to be paid in terms of Section 26 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 on the amount of arrears of rent was not paid by the respondent/tenant as demanded in the legal notice dated 12.12.1996 Ex. AW-1/10, and therefore, benefit of Section 14(2) of the Act cannot be given.