Default by tenant if willful default.

This is a petition filed by the tenant against the Order of eviction passed by the appellate authority, viz. VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras. The appellate authority has reversed the Order of the Rent Controller, XI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, dismissing the petition for eviction filed by the respondent/landlady.

2. The only ground of eviction is wilful default in payment of rent for the period from June, 1983 to September, 1984. The agreed rent is Rs.145 per mensum. It is not in dispute that the landlady had received a sum of Rs.3,000 by way of advance to be returned at the time of vacating the premises after the expiration of the tenancy. The tenant contended that he was paying rent regularly from the inception of the tenancy and also for the period of question. According to him, the landlady used to issue receipts every month and she did so upto May, 1983, but she stopped issuing receipts from June, 1983, though rent was being paid regularly, the landlady wanted the tenant to pay a sum of Rs.10,000 by way of advance in order to meet her commitments, as the tenant failed to pay the said sum, the landlady took advantage of the non-issue of rental receipts and filed the petition for eviction on the ground of wilful default, the rent was sent by Money Order in October, 1984, but the same was refused to be received by the landlady.

.3. In the evidence, the landlady deposed that she used to give receipts for payment of rent and as no rent was paid for the period in question, viz., June, 1983 to September, 1984, receipts were not issued. She issued a notice on 19. 1984 calling upon the tenant to pay the rent, but, he did not receive the notice. It returned unserved. According to her, after the filing of the petition the rent was paid to her counsel. On the date of evidence, there was arrears of five months of rent. In cross-examination, the landlady said that there was an agreement of lease and the monthly rent was Rs.125 at the inception. A sum of Rs.30,000 was paid by way of advance which was to be returned to the tenant at the time of his vacating the premises. She received a sum of Rs.1,000 as further advance. It was to be deducted in the monthly rent at the rate of Rs.50 per mensem. Thus a sum of Rs.700 had been deducted already and a balance of Rs.300 was payable by her. In 1984 she performed her daugther’s marriage. She did not demand a sum of Rs.10,000 as advance from the tenant. A suggestion is made to her that she did not issue receipts and was delaying such issue in spite of payment of rent from July, 1983 to September, 1984 and she has denied that suggestion. She also denied the suggestion that she refused to receive rent for October sent by Money Order. She also denied the further suggestion that there was no arrears of rent.

4. The tenant has given evidence as follows: The monthly rent is Rs.145 He has paid rent from June, 1983 to September, 1984. The landlady gave receipt for the month of June, but for the subsequent period she did not give any receipt. When demand was made for receipt, she said she would issue the same. The rent for October, 1984 was sent by Money Order. It was returned. He had asked for the receipts for the prior period. He had been paying rent through the advocate from October, 1984 onwards. He gave a loan of Rs.1,000 in 1983. The landlady demanded Rs.10,000 by way of loan in 1984 for her daugther’s marriage. He did not pay the same. Taking advantage of non-issue of receipts, she has filed the petition on a false pretext. There is no arrears of rent. No notice was received by him demanding arrears of rent. In the cross examination, the tenant admitted that the landlady was issuing receipts from the inception of tenancy and he used to sign in the counterfoils. He admits the signatures found in the counterfoils. He admits that the address found in Ex.A-2, returned cover, is his address. He denied the suggestion that he sent the rent by Money Order after the filing o