The landlord is the petitioner in this case. There seems to be previous proceedings against the tenant when he committed default in payment of rents, but those proceedings seem to have been compromised. Finally there was proceeding in H.R.C.O.P. No. 72 of 1966 in respect of the default committed by the respondent herein. Even that petition was compromised according to Exhibit A-7 in and by which the tenant agreed to pay rent regularly on or before the 5th of every succeeding month. The rent has to be reckoned according to the English calendar month. In spite of the said agreement the tenant has not paid rents from nth November, 1966 to 27th February, 1967. Necessarily the landlord has filed H.R.C.O.P. No. 144 of 1967 on 3rd April, 1967, contending that the tenant-respondent herein has committed wilful default in paying rents for the period from 11th November, 1966 to 28th February, 1967, at the rate of Rs. 35 per month, the premises being a nonresidential one.

2. The contention of the respondent seems to have been that the landlord accepted rent at irregular intervals in the sense that the landlord agreed to receive the rent in lump sum instead of every month. The said con