JUDGEMENT
S.S. Chadha, J. -
(1.)This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated November 16, 1984 passed by Shri R. K. Sharma, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, dismissing an application of the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in a pending eviction petition filed by respondent No. 1 (landlord).
(2.)There was an earlier petition for eviction of the petitioner (tenant) filed on March 1, 1977 on grounds under Section 14(1)(a}(c) and (e) of the Deihi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). A question arose in that petition as to the claim of deductions and adjustments by the petitioner herein on account of annual white washing, painting, repairs etc. The Rent Control Tribunal in its order dated October 18, 1978 directed that the claim of the petitioner would be decided by the Rent Controller after taking evidence of the parties. That petition was subsequently withdrawn.
(3.)The landlord filed another eviction petition (out of which the present proceedings have arisen) in December 1981 being case No. 384/81 on the ground of personal bona-fide necessity under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act. The landlord filed an application under Section 15(2) of the Act for directing the tenant to pay or deposit the entire arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 1000.00 per month with effect from April 1, 1982. The tenant while opposing the application claimed adjustment of the amounts spent by him on repairs, white washing etc., as also the additional security tor electricity connection deposited with DE.S.U. The Additional Rent Controller by order dated August 11, 1983 directed the tenant, under Sec. 15(2) of theAct, to pay to the landlord or deposit arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 1000.00 per month with effect from May 7, 1982 till date upto the end of the month previous to that in which the deposit was to be made, within one month from the date of the Order and to continue to deposit the future rent month by month by the 15th of each succeeding month at the same rate. It was, however, observed "whether the respondent (tenant) is entitled to any such adjustment is a question which needs investigation and shall be considered alongwith the merits of the case."
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.