A demand for rent must be a proper demand, containing sufficient details of the amount claimed and the period for which it is claimed. A demand that fails to provide these details is not a valid demand and does not create a legal liability to pay rent.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from the order of the rent control tribunal dated April 25, 1978.

( 2 ) THE appellant is a tenant of the ground floor of house No. E-130, Greater Kailash No. 1, New Delhi on a monthly rent of Rs. 650. 00. He took the premises on July 1, 1971. The respondent is the landlord. On January 3, 1976, the landlord brought an application for ejectment of the tenant on three grounds. One was bona fide requirement. The second was nonpayment of rent. The third was non-residence of the tenant in the premises for more than one year. The Additional Controller, Smt. Manju Goel dismissed the application. On appeal the tribunal ordered ejectment of the tenant on all the three grounds.

( 3 ) I shall first take up the ground of non-payment of rent. On October 22, 1975, the landlord s counsel served a notice of demand on the tenant. In the notice the landlord said : "you arc very irregular in payment of rent and a sum of Rs. 12,350. 00 are due from you on account of arrears of rent calculated upto October 31, 1975, after deducting the total amount paid by you uptil now since occupation of the tenancy premises by you. " In the end he called upon the tenant to pay the aforesaid arrears of rent within two months of the receipt of the notice and to vacate the premises.

( 4 ) IN the application the ground of non-payment of rent was set out in these words:

"the respondent is a regular defaulter in the payment of rent and a sum of Rs. 13,650. 00 is due from him towards arrears of rent which he has not paid inspite of repeated demands, oral as well as written".

( 5 ) THE tenant in his written statement denied that he was in arrears. He alleged that he had paid rent upto October, 1975. The rent of November, 1975, he sent by cheque which was returned to him. The tenant said that he was prepared to pay the rent due from him from November 19 75 onwards. He also took an objection that the landlord "has not stated from what date to what date the amount on account of rent is due from the respondent to the petitioner. "

( 6 ) ON. November 11, 19 76, the tenant made an application to the Additional Controller under Order 6 Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure. In the application he stated that on June 1, 1976, he had been deprived by the la. ndlord of lawn and verandah which were in his tenancy and occupation. On this ground he claimed that he was entitled to suspend the rent. The tenant submitted that he may be allowed to incorporate in the written statement the plea of deprivation of lawn and verandah and suspension of rent. The landlord opposed this application. The Additional Controller on January 24, 1977, dismissed the application on the ground that the precise words sought to be added had not been specified and no site plan of the portion which has been snatched from the tenant had been filed.

( 7 ) AFTER dismissing the application the Additional Controller proceeded to make an order under Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the Act ). As the tenant s counsel admitted before the Additional Controller that no rent was paid after October, 1975, she ordered the tenant to deposit all arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 650. 00 per month from November 1, 1975, to December 31, 1976 within one month of the date of the passing of the order and subsequently rent month by month by the 15th of each succeeding month.

( 8 ) THE tenant appealed to the tribunal. The tribunal dismissed the appeal on February 16, 1977. But it observed that the site plan had been filed by the tenant indicating the portion of which he had been deprived. As the tribunal thought that it was open to a party to make a fresh application in proper form, it held that the appeal was not maintainable as the order did not affect any rights. In the result it confirmed the order of the controller directing the tenant to deposit rent from November 1, 1975.

( 9 ) THE tenant did not deposit the rent. On September 27, 1977, his defence was struck out under