R. V. RAVEENDRAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a tenant's revision petition under Section 115 of Code of Civil procedure.

( 2 ) THE respondent is the landlord and the petitioner is the tenant (Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited) in regard to the petition schedule premises in House Rent Case No. 326 of 1984 filed by the landlord against the tenant under clause (a) of the proviso to Section 21 (1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 ('act' for short) in the court of the learned Munsiff, Mangalore.

( 3 ) THE case of the landlord is briefly as follows : There was a term lease of the premises upto the end of 30-9-1983 in favour of the tenant. The tenant continued as a statutory tenant from 1-10-1983. The rent for the premises is Rs. 468. 75 per month. The tenant did not pay the rents from 1-10-1983. Therefore, a registered notice dated 5-8-1984 was sent by the landlord to the tenant demanding payment of rent. The said notice was sent to the Registered Office (Bombay), Regional Office (Bangalore) and the Sales Office (Mangalore) of the tenant. The notice was served on the Bombay Office on 13-8-1984 and on the Bangalore Office on 10-8-1984. The tenant tendered the entire arrears of rent for the period 1-10-1983 to 31-10-1984 by cheque dated 13-10-1984, sent by post on 17-10-1984 and delivered to the landlord at Mangalore only on 20-10-1984. According to the landlord, the tenant ought to have tendered the rents on or before 10-10-1984 (that is two months from the date of service of notice on the Bangalore Office of the tenant); and as it was not so tendered, the tenant is liable to be evicted under Section 21 (l) (a) of the Act. The eviction petition was filed on 20-11-1984.

( 4 ) THE tenant contended that cheques were being regularly sent from its Head Office at Bombay. It has hundreds of leasehold premises throughout the country and to facilitate payment of rents to all its landlords, it had computerised the processing and issue of cheques; that on account of computer failure, there was some delay in payment; and that as the landlord has failed to report the non-receipt of the rents cheques, there was also no occasion for manual verification as to whether the rents had been sent to the landlord every month. The tenant submitted that the failure to pay the rents for about a year was on account of a bona fide mistake and prayed that the delay may be condoned by the court, as having been satisfactorily explained. The tenant further contended that when the cheque dated 13-10-1984 was accepted and encashed, the payment should be related back to the date of the cheque; and as the cheque was issued on 13-10-1984, within two months of the date of service on its Registered Office (13-8-1984) there is no default; and even if there is any slight delay, it is neither deliberate nor on account of any negligence and therefore the eviction petition should be rejected. The tenant also contended that the landlord had not made out any ground under Section 21 (1) proviso (a) to seek eviction.

( 5 ) THE landlord examined her son and Attorney as P. W. 1. One of the officials of the local office of the tenant at Mangalore was examined as r. W. 1. The landlord exhibited the registered lease dated 14-10-1963 (Ex. P. 1), letter of renewal of lease dated 11-7-1973 (Ex. P. 2), copy of the registered notice dated 5-8-1984 (Ex. P. 3), the postal acknowledgement for having served the said notices at tenant's Bombay Office on 13-8-1984 (Ex. P. 4) and the Tenants Remittance Advice attached to the rent cheque for Rs. 6,093. 75 ps. (Ex. P. 5 ). The landlord exhibited the copies of eviction petition filed against the tenant by some other landlord in HRC 86 of 1985 and the objections filed in that petition by the tenant as Ex. P. 6 and Ex. P. 7. The tenant did not produce any documents.

( 6 ) THE only point formulated by the Trial Court for consideration was whether the tenant proved that it had sufficient cause for non-payment of the rents within two months from the date

Click Here to Read the rest of this document