A tenant's failure to comply with an order of the Rent Controller under section 15 (3) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, including payment of future interim rent, disentitles him to the benefit of section 14 (2) of the Act, which protects tenants from eviction for non-payment of arrears of rent.

V. S. Deshpande. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a landlord s second appeal against the decision of the Rent Control Tribunal dismissing his application for the eviction of the respondent tenant and reversing the order of the Rent Controller who had ordered the eviction of the tenant on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent under proviso (a) to section 14 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, (hereinafter called the Act ).

( 2 ) THE landlord filed a petition for eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant had failed to pay the contractual rent of Rs. 35. 00 per month and that a notice of demand for the arrears of the rent had been given as required by proviso (a) to section 14 (1) of the Act.

( 3 ) THE tenant defended the petition on the ground that the contractual rent was only Rs. 30. 00 per month. He also prayed for the fixation of the standard rent.

( 4 ) AS the rate of the rent was disputed by the parties, the Rent Controller fixed the interim rent at Rs, 30. 00 per month under section 15 (3 ). and ordered the tenant to deposit the arrears of the rent as also the future rent at that rate. The tenant paid the arrears of the rent as ordered by the Rent Controller but delayed the payment of future rent twice and thus defaulted in the payment of future rent. The Controller ultimately fixed the standard rent at Rs. 30. 00 per month. He declined to strike off the defence of the tenant under section 15 (7) of the Act but held that the tenant had not complied with his order for the deposit of the interim rent and. therefore, the tenant was not entitled to the protection of section 14 (2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that the tenant was liable to be evicted under proviso (a) to section 14 (1) of the Act.

( 5 ) THE Rent Control Tribunal was of the view that the tenant having paid the arrears of the rent on which the eviction petition was based as ordered by the Rent Controller under section 15 (3), the tenant could not be evicted under proviso (a) to section 14 (1) of the Act even though the tenant did not comply with the order of the Rent Controller strictly inasmuch as he failed to pay the future interim rent in time. He confirmed the Rent Controller s finding that the standard rent should be Rs. 30. 00 per month, but dismissed the eviction petition of the landlord on the ground that the arrears of the rent on which the eviction petition was based had been paid by the tenant in time as per the order of the Rent Controller under section 15 (3) of the Act.

( 6 ) THE sole question that arises for decision by me is, whether the default in the payment of future interim rent fixed by the Rent Controller under section 15 (3) of the Act disentitles the tenant to the benefit of section 14 (2) of the Act.

( 7 ) IT is true that the eviction petition was originally based on a cause of action arising prior to the filing of the said petition, namely, the non-payment of arrears of the rent by the tenant and a notice of demand made by the landlord within the meaning of proviso (a) to section 14 (1) of the Act. This is in accordance with the principle that a cause of action must arise in favour of a party before such a party can come to a Court of law to seek relief. Section 15 (3) read with S. 15 (1) of the Act gives power to the Rent Controller to fix an interim rent and to order that the amount of arrears of the rent on the basis of which the eviction petition was brought as also the rent becoming due thereafter shall be paid by the tanant to the landlord by the 15th of each month till the standard rent is fixed by the Rent Controller. The significance of the provisions contained in section 15 (3) is two fold: on the one hand, it deals equitably with the landlord by ensuring that the tenant does not take an undue advantage of the litigation by refraining from paying rent to the landlord. On the other hand, the compliance by the tenant with this order of the Rent Controller gives him the statutory benefit of section 14 (2 which says that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document