IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the defendant to substantiate claims with evidence, and the Court's reliance on credible testimony and admissible evidence to make its decision.

JUDGMENT

Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. - This regular second appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'), impugns the judgment dated 25.03.2023 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi ('First Appellate Court') in RCA No. 16/2022, titled as 'Manish Tanwar v. Subodh Kumar Wadhwa', whereby the First Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent herein and set aside the judgment dated 04.06.2022 passed by the Civil Judge-01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi ('Trial Court') in CS SCJ No. 99100/2016.

1.1. The Trial Court vide judgment dated 04.06.2022 dismissed the suit holding that the same is barred by Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 ('DRC Act') on the finding that the rate of rent which was initially Rs. 4,200/- per month was reduced to Rs. 1,400/- per month.

1.2. The First Appellate Court, however, vide the impugned judgment reversed the said findings of the Trial Court. The First Appellate Court has returned a finding that the admitted rate of rent for the suit premises was Rs. 4,200/- per month and rejected the defense set up by the Appellant i.e., the defendant, that the rate of rent was reduced verbally from Rs. 4,200/- to Rs. 1,400/- per month. The said Court held that the lease had been validly terminated with the service (on 29.04.2008) of the notice dated 24.04.2008 and consequently, granted the relief of possession, recovery of arrears of rent Rs. 33,600/- with interest at 18% p.a., and awarded mesne profits at Rs. 10,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.06.2008 till the recovery of the possession.

1.3. The Appellant herein is the defendant and the Respondent is the plaintiff. For ease of reference, the parties are being referred to by their original rank and status as was before the Trial Court.

Pleadings of the Respondent/Plaintiff

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are as under:

2.1. The plaintiff had filed the civil suit on 04.06.2008 in his capacity as the owner/landlord of the property bearing Room No. 202, second floor, C-1, Ring Road, Naraina, New Delhi - 110020 ('suit premises'). In the plaint it is stated that the suit premises was let out to the defendant in December, 2001, for a period of three (3) years, subject to payment of monthly license fee of Rs. 4,200/-.

2.2. It is stated that the agreement expired in December, 2004, i.e., after three (3) years, due to efflux of time, however, the defendant continued to occupy and use the suit property. It is stated that the plaintiff continued to accept Rs. 4,200/- per month, without acknowledging any right of the defendant in the suit property. It is stated that the defendant last paid rent of Rs. 4,200/- per month for month ending in July, 2007 and thereafter, willfully defaulted in payment of rent from August, 2007.

2.3. It is stated that in view of the default, the tenancy was terminated by the plaintiff effective 31.05.2008, vide termination notice dated 24.04.2008 and plaintiff called upon the defendant to pay (rent) for the period August 2007 to May, 2008 (10 months) the outstanding sum of Rs. 42,000/-calculated at Rs. 4,200/- per month.

2.4. It is stated that subsequent to the due service of notice of termination dated 24.04.2008, the defendant, unilaterally and without communication to the plaintiff, deposited a sum of Rs. 8,400/- on 23.05.2008 in the plaintiff's bank account. The plaintiff thereafter, promptly issued a letter dated 02.06.2008 to the defendant putting him to the notice that the aforesaid unilateral deposit made after issuance of the termination notice has been appropriated towards the arrears.

2.5. Accordingly, in the suit filed on 04.06.2008, the plaintiff after accounting for the said receipt of Rs. 8,400/- sought recovery of the remaining sum of Rs. 33,600/- as arrears for the period ending May, 2008. Pleadings of the Appellant/Defendant

2.6. The defendant filed his written statement, stating that he was inducted as a tenant in the