Daya Wanti vs Shri Parshotam Dass

Gokal Chand Mital, J.—On 21st March 1973, an application for ejectment was filed by the landlord Daya Wanti against the tenant Gian Chand on the ground of nonpayment of rent with effect from 1st December, 1972, rent being Rs. 100/- P.M. On the first hearing of the application the tenant tendered Rs. 400/- as rent from 1st December, 1972 to 31st March, 1973, besides tendering Rs. 5/-as interest and Rs. 30/- as costs which were accepted by the landlord under protest. The Rent Controller by order dated 22nd November, 1973, ordered the eviction of the tanant on the ground that the tender of interest was short as the interest was more than Rs. 7/-. The tenant went up in appeal and the appellate authority allowed the same after coming to the conclusion that the rent note was executed on 6th October, 1969, with effect from 1st October, 1969, for a period of 11 months wherein there was condition of paying rent in advance and after the lapse of the period as condition in the rent note, the terms and conditions in the rent note ceased to apply and, therefore, tenant was not liable to pay rent in advance according to the rent note and, therefore, since the application for ejectment was filed in March, 73, rent for the month of March, 1973, was not payable according to Section 13(2)(1) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, (hereinafter called the Act), and therefore, out of the surplus amount of Rs. 100/- which was tendered for the month of March, 1973, Rs. 2/-could be treated as having been paid towards interest. In this view of the matter it was found that the tender was valid. In the result the appeal was allowed and the order of ejectment was set aside. The land lord has come up in revision to this Court.

After hearing the counsel for the parties, I find that the ejectment petition and the revision deserve to be dismissed but for totally different reasons.

The appellate authority was in error in taking the view of law that after the period of tenancy expired, the terms and condition of the rent note ceased to apply to the parties. Practically all the terms and conditions of the rent note continue even after the expiry of the period of tenancy as it was so held by a Division Bench of this Court in Daval Chand v. The Union of India and others 1970 R.C.R. 205. Accordingly, the order of the appellate authority to this extent is reversed.

A copy of the rent note has been brought on record as A.I., according to which rent was payable in advance. It is not stated by which date it would be paid. Therefore it will be presumed that during the currency of the month the tenant will pay rent to the landlord and in this view of the matter keeping in view the provisions contained in Section 13(2)(1) of the Act, on 21st March, 1973, when the ejectment application was filed, rent was due up o the month of February, 1973, and not upto March, 1973. Therefore, on the first hearing of the application the tenant had to tender rent for the months of December, January and February which would amount to Rs. 300/- whereas he tendered Rs. 400/-. Therefore, there was a surplus tender of Rs. 100/- and if interest amounting to Rs. 2/- was short, it could be adjusted from Rs. 100/- and in his view of the matter it cannot be held that the tendered amount on the first date of hearing was short and, therefore, invalid.

For the reasons recorded above, revision petition is dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs.