A notice of demand for arrears of rent under Section 14(1)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1985 is valid if it specifies the amount of arrears, the rate of rent, and the period for which the rent is due.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control, Act, 1985 (for short the Act) is directed against the judgment and order dated 1st March, 1980 of the Rent Control Tribunal confirming the order dated 19th March, 1979 of the Additional Rent Controller passing an order of eviction under Section 14 (l) (a) of the Act against the appellants.

( 2 ) THE brief facts are : The appellants M/s. H. M. Doyal Co. were tenants in shop No. 5394, Light Building, 58, G. B. Road, Delhi on a monthly rent of Rs. 27. 50 besides other charges. Shri R. N. Chitkara, respondent No. 1 purchased the property by means of a sale deed dated ll th August, 1964, Respondent No. 1 has alleged that in September, 1972 he filed a petition for eviction of the appellants and respondent No. 2 Ram Lal on various grounds including the ground of non-payment of rent. He had alleged in the previous eviction petition that the appellants were in arrears of rent from ;st June, 1971 and they neither paid nor tendered the arrears of rent within two months of the service of a notice of demand, that an order under Section 15 (1) of the Act directing the appellants to deposit rent from 1st June, 1971 was passed. The Additional Rent Controller by order dated 2nd November 1976 held that the ground of eviction under Section 14 (l) (a) of the Act was available but the tenants having complied with the order under Section 15 (1) of the Act were entitled to the benefit of Section 14 (2) of the Act. The Additional Controller gave them benefit under Section 14 (2) of the Act and dismissed the eviction petition. Respondent No. 1 has now alleged that the appellants deposited rent for the period ending October, 1976 in the previous eviction case, that he received a letter dated 20-3-1978 along with a cheque dated 16th March, 1978 for Rs. 247. 50 purporting to be rent from July, 1977 to March, 1978 (nine months) from the appellants, that he did not accept the cheque as it did not cover the whole of arrears of rent due and the cheque was not a legal tender. He has further alleged that he returned the said cheque with his registered letter dated 27th March, 1978 calling upon the appellants to remit the whole of the arrears of rent and to treat his letter dated 27th March, 1978 as a notice of demand ; that the appellants neither paid nor tendered the whole of the arrears of rent due within two months from the notice of demand although they have been in arrears of rent since 1st November, 1976, that they have committed second default and are thus liable to eviction under Section 14 (1) (a) of the Act.

( 3 ) THE appellants in their written statement have pleaded that no notice of demand was ever served, that a cheque dated 27-5-77 for Rs. 247. 50 as rent from October, 1976 to June, 1977 with letter dated 27th May, 1977 was sent by registered A. D. post, that another cheque for Rs. 247. 50 dated 16th March, 213 1978 as rent from July, 1977 to March, 1978 with letter dated 20th March, 1978 was sent by registered A. D. post, that respondent No. 1 wrongfully refused to encash the said two cheques. They have pleaded that they did receive on 30th March, 1978 an unsigned letter in a registered cover from respondent No. l.

( 4 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 in support of his case examined himself as A. W. 1 while the appellants examined two partners Prem Parkash (R. W. 1) and Gursaran Dass (R. W. 2 ). The Additional Rent Controller by order dated 19th March, 1979 held that a valid notice of demand was served, that the cheque dated 27th May, 1977 for the period October, 1976 to June, 1977 was not sent by the appellants, that the other cheque for the period July, 1977 to March, 1978 sent to respondent No. 1 was not for the entire period and the same was returned to the appellants and the cheque was not a legal tender, that the appellants had neither paid nor tendered any rent after the receipt of the notice dated 27th March, 1978. It was further held that the appellants having earlier tak