A tenant must deposit provisional rent in the Rent Controller's court if the landlord refuses the tender; failure to comply with this procedural requirement leads to an order of eviction.

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the tenant against the order dated 23.12.2022 passed by the learned Rent Controller whereby Rent Petition filed by the respondent/landlord has been allowed; and the order dated 01.04.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority whereby Rent Appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

Brief facts of the case in chronological order are as follows: -

15.01.1970 : The petitioner had entered demised premises as tenant vide Rent Note dated 15.01.1970 (Annexure P-2) at monthly rent of Rs.32.

07.12.1991: Subsequently, vide order dated 07.12.1991 (Annexure P-3), Rent Controller had assessed fair rent @ Rs.65 per month.

02.09.2016: On 02.09.2016, respondent/landlord had sought ejectment of the petitioner from the demised premises by way of Rent Petition.

16.12.2016: Vide order dated 16.12.2016 (Annexure P-1), learned Rent Controller had assessed provisional rent and had assessed arrears of rent as Rs.4,125/-. The petitioner had offered to tender the said amount however, the respondent had declined to receive the same by stating that tender is short as house tax is not included.

04.07.2017: On 04.07.2017, petitioner had filed reply to the Rent Petition and had admitted landlord-tenant relationship between the parties and had also admitted arrears of rent.

22.04.2019: On 22.04.2019, the petitioner had filed application for permission to deposit the assessed rent.

13.12.2021: On 13.12.2021, respondent/landlord had filed an application for eviction order against the tenant due to non-deposit of provisional rent, assessed under Section 13(2)(1) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973.

23.12.2022: Vide order dated 23.12.2022 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Charkhi Dadri, application dated 22.04.2019 filed by the petitioner was dismissed; and application dated 13.12.2021 passed by the respondent/landlord was allowed. Vide impugned order dated 23.12.2022, it was directed as follows: -

“22. Hence, finding support from the said case law, this Court is of the view that the arguments advanced by petitioner has merit. Consequently, the application dated 22.04.2019, filed on behalf of respondent is hereby dismissed and the application dated 13.12.2021, filed on behalf of petitioner is hereby allowed. Consequently, the present petition also stands allowed. Resultantly, the respondent is hereby ordered to put the petitioner in possession of the premises in question within three months from the date of passing of this order. Memo of costs be drawn accordingly.”

13.02.2023: On 13.02.2023, petitioner had preferred an Appeal against the said order dated 23.12.2022.

01.04.2024: Vide order dated 01.04.2024 passed by learned Appellate Authority, Charkhi Dadri, Rent Appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed.

Hence, present revision petition.

It is inter alia submitted by ld. Senior Counsel for the petitioner that it has been categorically recorded by learned Rent Controller in para 2(a) of the order dated 23.12.2022 that the respondent had sought arrears of rent for the period 01.01.2016 to 31.07.2016 “alongwith House Tax/Property Tax, interest and costs, is due from the tenant; that the total House Tax for the years 1995 to 2013 is Rs.56,749/- and the Property Tax from the years 2014 to 2016 is Rs.5940/- @ Rs.1980/- per year, thus, total House Tax/Property Tax amounting to Rs.62,689/- is also due from the Tenant which the tenant has not paid to the petitioner/landlord, therefore, the tenant is liable evicted from the rented plot on the grounds of non-payment of arrears of rent.”

Learned Senior counsel contends that as per the Rent Note/Deed (Annexure P-2); as also as per order dated 17.12.1991 (Annexure P-3) passed in Rent Case previously filed by the respondent against the petitioner, rate of rent had been fixed by learned Rent Controller, Charkhi Dadri as Rs.65 per month. It is submitted that it is nowhere stated that petitioner also has to pay hou