A tenant cannot be considered a wilful defaulter if he has paid the entire arrears of rent claimed by the landlady before the eviction petition is filed.

( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision petition arises tinder the Andhra Pradesh Buildings, (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act. The Landlady is the revision petitioner.

( 2 ) THE landlady filed an eviction petition before the Rent Controller alleging that the rent of the premises in question, which was let out to the respondent-tenant was Rs. 12/- per month exclusive of electricity charges, that the tenant has been a defaulter throughout in the past, and that on the date of the petition, some arrears of rent were due from him. The landlady also claimed payment of rent according to the Hindi Calender.

( 3 ) THE respondent-tenant opposed the eviction petition on the ground that in the past, the landlady has been collecting the rents from the tenants by sending her agent to the premises and that the landlady s agent purposely avoided coming to him. The default, if any, was not wilful. By the date of the eviction petition, the landlady sent a notice asking him to pay arrears of rent of Rs. 204/-and the sa id amount was paid by him and no arrears of rent was due on the day of the petition.

( 4 ) IN support of their respective versions, the landlady examined her son. and the tenant examined himself. After considering the evidence, the rent Controller came to the conclusion that the tenant was not a wilful defaulter, and accordingly dismissed the petition. On appeal, the appellate authority also considered the evidence and came to the conclusion that the tenant was not a wilful defaulter. It is against the order of the appellate authority that the landlady has come up in revision to this court. .

( 5 ) MR. Subramanyam the learned counsel appearing for the landlady, vehemently contended that the concurrent finding of the authorities below that the rent was not payable according to the Hindi Calender is perverse and patently incorrect. There is no duty cast upon the landlady to go and collect the rents from the tenant. It was the tenant s duty to pay the rent at the landlady s premises and if he did not do so, he would be considered as a defaulter. Since the evidence establishes that at no time the tenant had paid the rent month after month regularly and was in the habit of paying rent in lumpsum at various intervals, it is abundantly clear that the tenant was a wilful defaulter, and the authorities below erred in coming to a contrary conclusion.

( 6 ) 1 have considered the arguments addressed by the advocates for the parties and also perused the orders of the authorities below. The question whether the rent was payable according to the Hindi Calender or according to the english Calender, becomes irrelevant in this case. However, on going through the evidence that has been pointed out before me, I find that the landlady has fairly established her case that the rent was payable according to the Hindi Calender. But that does not advance her case and entitle her to get an eviction order against the tenant. Ex. A-1 is the notice sent by the landlady through her lawyer to the tenanc on 1-8-1963, According to Ex. A. 1, she claimed Rs. 104/. This is what is stated in Ex. A. 1. "you inspite of repeated requests and demands failed to pay the rent, which have fallen since Mitti Phalgun Sudha I samvat 2073, (12-3-1967) to Mitti Shravan Badi Amavshya Samvat 202. 5 (25-7-1968) i. e. , for the period of 17 months and an amount of rs. 204/- remains unpaid towards the arrears of rent exclusive of due electricity charges. "

( 7 ) THE tenant sent a reply Ex. A. 3, His reply appears to be vague. He purported to say that the rent fell into arrears on account of the conduct of the landlady in not sending her agent. It was also specifically mentioned in the reply notice that the landlady had disconnected the electric light in the premises. Even before sending the reply, the tenant sent an amount of rs. 204/- on 14-8-1968 by money order, and Ex. B-4 is the money order coupon. The money order coupon was received by the landlady under protest. Thus, from th