The court emphasized the interpretation of Section 13(2)(i) of the Act, which dictates when rent becomes due, and the requirement for the Rent Controller to assess arrears of rent and interest as per the Act.

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This petition Filed under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control) of Rent and Eviction Act, 1973 (for brevity the Act) challenges order dated 18.4.1984 passed by the Appellate Authority, Namaul accepting the appeal of the tenant respondent in which the order dated 8.2.1984 passed by the Rent Controller, Namaul was challenged. The Rent Controller has allowed the application of the landlord-petitioner on the ground that tender of rent by him was not valid and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Section 13(2) of the Act, the tenant respondent was liable to be ejected.

2. Brief facts of the case necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the present petition are that the tenant-respondent was inducted in the demised premises as tenant @ Rs. 50/- per month vide rent deed dated 5.3.1996. The shop in dispute fell to the share of the landlord-petitioner and his brother one Kunj Lal, who is respondent No. 2 in the present proceedings. Both of them became the landlord of the demised premises in view of the family settlement arrived at between the members of the family. The landlord-petitioner filed ejectment petition of the tenant-respondent on 21.1.1982 alleging that the tenant-respondent has not paid rent from 1.5.1979 to 31.12.1981. Further allegations with regard to non payment of house tax etc. were also levelled. The tenant-respondent tendered the arrears of rent representing the period from 1.5.1979 to 31.12.1981 for a period of 31 months which includes-the payment of house tax, costs and interest. The total amount paid was Rs. 1,991/-. The Rent Controller allowed the ejectment petition by concluding that the tendered amount by the tenant-respondent was not valid because the rent was required to be paid for 32 months and not for 31 months. Consequently, he found that the tender of rent was short by one month and ordered the ejectment of the tenant-respondent on that basis.

3. On appeal to the appellant authority, the view taken was that the tenant-respondent was liable to tender rent only from 1.5,1979 to 30.11.1981 for a period of 31 months and not for 32 months. In support of his conclusion, the Appellate Authority has given various reasons in para 9 of the judgment by observing that no exact amount of arrears of rent or of the house tax was given by the landlord-petitioner in his ejectment petition. Further reasons given are that the landlord-petitioner failed to disclose that the tenant was bound under the agreement to pay any advance monthly rent and that the rent note is not even admissible in evidence as it required registration. Even otherwise it was also held that there was no provision for tendering the rent in advance and the rent note was between the previous landlord and the tenant-respondent. No fresh rent note was executed between the parties. The Appellate Authority then held that the rent claimed in the rent petition is @ Rs. 50/- p.m. for the period from 1.5.1979 to 31.12.1981 and whereas the landlord-petitioner could have released the rent upto November, 1981 because the rent for the month of December, 1981 was to become due/payable by the end of January, 1982. It was on this basis that the Appellate Authority accepted the amount tendered by the tenant-respondent as the valid tender representing the total sum of rent for 31 months.

4. I have heard Sh. Anil Rathee, learned counsel for the landlord-petitioner and Sh. O.P. Goyal, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sh. Sunil Rana, Advocate for the tenant-respondents.

5. Sh. Anil Rathee has asserted that the tender amount was deficient by one month and the order of the Rent Controller has been illegally reversed by the Appellate Authority. According to the learned counsel the rent of preceding month usually becomes payable by the 1st or 2nd week of the succeeding month and since the application for ejectment of the tenant-respondent was filed on 21.1.1982, the rent had become payable for the month of December, 1981 as