Back
1974 Supreme(Del) 94
High Court Of Delhi
MOHAMMAD ATIQUE SIUDIQUI - Appellant
Versus
MUNSHI ANUSAHMED - Respondent
SECOND APPEAL 306 of 1972
Decided On : 04/18/1974
G.N.AGGARWAL, V.B.ANDLEY
When there is a dispute about the rate of standard rent, Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, is not to be read in isolation, but has to be read along with Section 15 (3), and an order under Section 15 (1) has to be made with reference to the interim rent mentioned in Section 15 (3) and not with reference to the rate of rent at which the rent was last paid by the tenant to the landlord.
Headnote:
RENT CONTROL ACT - SECTION 15 (1) AND 15 (3) - INTERIM RENT - DISPUTE AS TO AMOUNT OF RENT PAYABLE - RATE OF INTERIM RENT UNDER SECTION 15 (3) - MODIFICATION OF ORDERS OF RENT CONTROL TRIBUNAL AND ADDITIONAL CONTROLLER.
Fact of the Case:
Tenant filed an application for fixation of standard rent under Section 9 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. During the pendency of the application, the landlord filed an application for eviction of the tenant under Section 14. The Additional Controller directed the tenant to pay arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 110.00 per month from September 1, 1971, up to the date of the order as well as for the subsequent period till the disposal of the application for eviction. The Tribunal affirmed the said order. The tenant challenged the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that when there is a dispute about the rate of standard rent, Section 15 (1) is not to be read in isolation, but has to be read along with Section 15 (3), and an order under Section 15 (1) has to be made with reference to the interim rent mentioned in Section 15 (3) and not with reference to the rate of rent at which the rent was last paid by the tenant to the landlord. The court further held that the interim rate of rent under Section 15 (3) should be the same as the interim rate of rent fixed under Section 10.
Issues: Whether the Additional Controller ought to have directed the tenant to pay or deposit arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 55.00 per month, the interim rent which had by then been fixed by him under Section 10 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Sections 15 (1) and 15 (3) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and held that when there is a dispute about the rate of standard rent, Section 15 (1) is not to be read in isolation, but has to be read along with Section 15 (3), and an order under Section 15 (1) has to be made with reference to the interim rent mentioned in Section 15 (3) and not with reference to the rate of rent at which the rent was last paid by the tenant to the landlord. The court further held that the interim rate of rent under Section 15 (3) should be the same as the interim rate of rent fixed under Section 10.
Final Decision: The court allowed the second appeal, modified the orders of the Rent Control Tribunal and the Additional Controller, and directed the tenant to pay or deposit in the Court of the Controller the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 110.00 per month from September 1, 1971 to March 7, 1972, and thereafter at the rate of Rs. 55.00 up to the date of the judgment, within six weeks from the date of the judgment, and to pay rent in future at the same rate of Rs. 55.00 per month by the 15th of each succeeding month till the disposal of the application for eviction by the Additional Controller.
( 1 ) THIS Second Appeal against Order has been filed by Mohd. Atique Siddiqui against an order, dated October 20, 1972, of Shri G. C. Jain, Rent Control Tribunal, in Rent Control Appeal, R. C. A. No. 316 of 1972, whereby an order, dated March 22, 1972, passed by Shri V. S. Aggarwal, Additional Controller, Delhi, in Suit No. 83 of 1972, directing the appellant herein to deposit arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 110. 00 P. M. was affirmed.
( 2 ) THE respondent, Munshi Anus Ahmed, filed an application under Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, for eviction of the appellant herein from the suit premises, inter alia on the ground that the appellant had not paid arrears of rent in spite of a demand. It was alleged in the application that the appellant had not paid the arrears of rent from April 1, 1971, at the agreed rate of Rs. 110. 00 per month despite service of a notice of demand. In his written statement, the appellant admitted the relationship of landlord and tenant between himself and the respondent. He, however, pleaded that the standard rent of the premises could not be more than Rs. 10. 00 per month, that rent from April 1, 1971, to August 31, 1971, at the rate of Rs. 110. 00 per month was paid on September 2, 1971, but no receipt was given to him by the respondent, and that the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent was not available to the respondent as the latter had already received the arrears of rent and there was no notice for the subsequent period demanding the arrears of rent for the said period.
( 3 ) THE appellant-tenant had earlier filed an application on August 17, 1971, under Section 9 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, for fixation of the standard rent. In that proceeding, Shri V. S. Aggarwal, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, passed an order on March 7, 1972, under Section 10 of the Act fixing, by consent of the parties, interim rent for the premises at Rs. 55. 00 per month during the pendency of the application for fixation of standard rent. The order stated that the interim rent was fixed with effect from August 17, 1971.
( 4 ) THEN, on March 22, 1972, the application for eviction came up before the Additional Controller for passing an order under Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, regarding the payment of arrears of rent. It was contended on behalf of the appellant- tenant that the interim rent had already been fixed at Rs. 55. 00 per month under Section 10 of the Act and, therefore, the tenant was liable to pay arrears of rent under Section 15 (1) of the Act at the rate of Rs. 55. 00 per month only. But, by his order, dated March 22, 1972, Shri V. S. Aggarwal, Additional Controller, held that under Section 15 (1) of the Act an order has to be made directing the tenant to pay the landlord or deposit in Court the rent calculated at the rate at which it was last paid, and that the fact that interim rent was fixed at Rs. 55. 00 per month under Section 10 of the Act in the proceedings for fixation of standard rent was immaterial. Dealing next with the contention on behalf of the tenant that rent from April 1, 1971, to August 31. 1971, had already been paid, the learned Controller observed that the said alleged payment was denied by the landlord and the same was, therefore, a matter to be determined on evidence later one, and that since there was no plea of payment for the subsequent period, i. e. from September 1, 1971, onwards, the tenant must be held liable to suffer an order under Section 15 (1), and the question of notice of demand for the said subsequent period could be considered at the stage of evidence. Accordingly, he ordered that the appellant-tenant shall deposit arrears of rent -at the rate of Rs. 110. 00 per month from September 1, 1971, up to the date of the order, and the rent for the subsequent period shall be paid by the fifteenth day of each succeeding month.
( 5 ) AGAINST the said order, the tenant preferred an appeal, R. C. A. No.
