A tenant cannot retract from a voluntarily agreed rent increase, especially when it has been acted upon for several years, as it does not violate statutory provisions.

JUDGMENT

MANOJ JAIN, J

1. It needs to be evaluated whether a tenant after voluntarily agreeing to enhance the rent can retract later.

2. The petitioners herein are landlords and respondent their tenant.

3. For the sake of convenience, I would be referring to the parties as per their nomenclature in the Eviction Petition and, therefore, the petitioners would be referred to as „landlord‟ and the respondent as „tenant‟.

4. The tenanted shop is J-158, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027 where a clinic is being run.

5. The crunch issue is with respect to „rate of rent‟.

6. The landlord filed Eviction Petition on the ground of non-payment of rent under Section 14(1)(a) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short “DRC Act”). In such Eviction Petition, it was claimed that the last rent paid by the tenant was upto September, 2009 when it was paid @ Rs. 2,357/- per month. However, in terms of one agreement/affidavit executed by tenant on 15.05.2000, the rent had become Rs. 2,592/- per month from May, 2010 and, thereafter, Rs. 2851/- per month from May, 2011. Besides the above, the electricity and water consumption charges were also payable by the tenant directly to the concerned Authorities.

7. The landlord also claimed in the Eviction Petition that the premises had been let out several years back and there was no written agreement when the suit shop had been let out. However, the tenant himself had executed one affidavit-cum-undertaking on 15.05.2000 and the above said rent was thus being claimed from him in view of such affidavit/undertaking given by the tenant himself.

8. It was averred in the Eviction Petition that despite the notice issued with respect to the rent due for the above said period, the entire payment of the “whole arrears of rent along with interest” had not been made. According to landlord, the total due amount of the rent was Rs. 78,964/-, besides interest but the tenant had remitted a cheque of Rs. 73,067/- towards arrears of rent and Rs. 14,880/- towards interest.

9. It was stated in the Eviction Petition that the aforesaid tender was not towards the complete arrears of rent and, therefore, the tenant had committed default as the entire arrears were not cleared within two months from the receipt of such notice dated 10.03.2012.

10. It was in the above said factual backdrop that eviction was sought.

11. As already noticed above, there was no rent agreement when the above said shop was initially let out to the tenant.

12. However, the tenant had executed one affidavit/undertaking and in such affidavit he claimed as under:-

“AFFIDAVIT/UNDERTAKING

A. K. Gupta S/o Sh. O.P. Gupta R/o F-85, Bali Nagar, N.D. do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-

1) That I am a tenant in the property bearing no. J-158, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi in respect of one garage utilized by me as a shop which premises were let out to me by late Sardar Warayam Singh.

2) That after the death of late Sr. Warayam Singh, I am paying the rent to the legal herein of Sr. Warayam Singh, namely, Smt. Swarn Kaur who is receiving the rent for herself and on behalf of other sons and daughters of late Sr. Warayam Singh.

3) That with the consent of landlords, I have installed a split Air Conditioner in the aforesaid premises and the unit is now mounted on the wall outside the premises with their consent and I have undertook to remove it as and when directed by the landlords in case of any kind whatsoever on the walls and would not obstruct any construction process on account of this Air Conditioner unit. I shall remove it as and when so directed till the construction is completed.

4) That the actual rate of rent as agreed is Rs. 1,000/- per month which I shall go on paying regularly in advance every month without any default. I also agree to increase the rent by 10% every year.

Verification: -

Verified at Delhi on 15 May 2000 that the contents of the above affidavit of mine are true and correct and nothing relevant has been concealed therefrom.

Deponent”

(emphasis supplied)

13. Suc