9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (9) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on March 19, 1963 sent to Sethi ₹ 320 by a postal money order which Sethi had refused to accept. Sethi denied that a money order sent by Chawla was brought to him by the postal peon. Chawla also pleaded that the contractual rent was excessive and that the rent of the premises let to him could not exceed ₹ 50 per month and prayed that standard rent may be fixed by the Controller. The Controller rejected that contention of Chawla and passed an order in ejectment. The order of ejectment passed by the Controller was confirmed in appeal by the Rent Control Tribunal, and a second appeal to the High Court was also unsuccessful. Chawla has appealed to. this Court with special ,leave. In support of the appeal counsel for Chawla contended: that the Controller was bound to determine the standard rent of the premises in the proceeding instituted by Sethi, and since the Controller failed to do so the order in ejectment was illegal; (ii) the Courts below were in error in holding that Chawla could not obtain the benefit of s. 14(2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958; (iii) that the legal presumption arising from the despatch of a postal money order for ₹ 320 addresse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the 2nd day of June 1944-- (a) if the basic rent of such premises per annum does not exceed six hundred rupees the basic rent; or (b) if the basic rent of such premises per annum exceeds six hundred rupees, the basic rent together with ten per cent of such basic rent; (2) where such premises have been let out at, any time on or after the 2nd day of June 1944-- (a) in any case where the rent of such premises has been fixed under the Delhi and Ajmer-Merwara Rent Control Act, 1947, or the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952-- (i) if such rent per annum does not exceed twelve hundred rupees, the rent so fixed; or (ii) if such rent per annum exceeds twelve hundred rupees, the rent so fixed together with ten per cent of such rent; (b) in any case, the rent calculated on the basis of seven and one-half per cent per annum of the aggregate amount of the reasonable cost of construction and the market price of the land comprised in the premises on the date of the commencement of the construction: Provided that where the rent so calculated exceeds twelve hundred rupees per annum, this clause shall have effect as if for the words seven and one half per cent , ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se before the commencement of this Act, within two years from such commencement; (b) in the case of any premises let after the commencement of this Act,-- (i) where the application is made by the landlord, within two years from the date on which the premises were let. to the tenant against whom the application is made; (ii) where the application is made by the tenant, within two years from the date on which the premises were let to the tenant; and (c) in the case of any premises in which the cause of action for lawful increase of rent arises after the commencement of this Act, within two years from the date on which the cause of action arises: Provided that the Controller may entertain the application after the expiry of the said period of two years, if he is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the application in time . An application for fixation of standard rent must be made within two years of the date of the commencement of the Act if the premises were let before the date of the commencement of the Act, and if the premises were let after the commencement of the Act within two years from the date of letting. The Controller ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of rent of those premises for three consecutive months. Section 15, insofar as it is relevant, provides: (1) In every proceeding for the recovery of possession of any premises on th e ground specified in clause (a) of the proviso to sub- section (1) of section 14, the Controller shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, make an order directing the tenant to pay to the landlord or deposit with the Controller within one month of the date of the order, an amount calculated at the rate of rent at which it was last paid for the period for which the arrears of the rent were legally recoverable from the tenant including the period subsequent thereto upto the end of the month previous to that in which payment or deposit is made and to continue to pay or deposit, month by month, by the fifteenth of each succeeding month, a sum equivalent to the rent at that rate. (3) If, in any proceeding referred to in sub-section (1), or sub-section (2), there is any dispute as to the amount of rent payable by the tenant, the Controller shall, within fifteen days of the date of the first hearing of the proceeding, fix an interim rent in relation to the premises to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contractual rent: after the standard rent is determined the landlord becomes disentitled to recover an amount in excess of the standard rent from the date on which the determination operates. We are unable to agree that standard rent of a given tenement is by virtue of s. 6 of the Act a fixed quantity, and the liability for payment of a tenant is circumscribed thereby even if the standard rent is not fixed by order of the Controller. Under the scheme of the Act standard rent of a given tenement is that amount only which the Controller determines. Until the standard rent is fixed by the Controller the contract between the landlord and the tenant determines the liability of the tenant to pay rent. That is clear from the terms of s. 9 of the Act. That section clearly indicates that the Controller alone has the power to fix the standard rent, and it cannot be determined out of court. An attempt by the parties to determine by agreement the standard rent out of court is not binding. By section 12 in an application for fixation of standard rent of premises the Controller may give retrospective operation to his adjudication for a period not exceeding one year before the date of the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section (3) of s. 15 refers to cases in which there is a dispute as to the amount of rent payable by the tenant. In that case the Controller has to fix within fifteen days of the date of the first hearing of the proceeding, interim rent for the premises to be paid or deposited in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) until the standard rent in relation thereto fixed having regard to the provisions of the Act. The determination of interim rent will be for the period after the date of the application and also for arrears. Counsel for Chawla contended that the expression dispute as to the amount of rent payable by the tenant in sub-s. (3) of s. 15 means a dispute raised by the tenant as to the standard rent payable . We are unable to agree. The dispute, referred to in s. 15(3) is the dispute about contractual rent payable. When such a dispute is raised the Controller has, within fifteen days of the date of the first heating of the proceeding, to fix interim rent payable by the tenant in accordance with the provisions of sub-s. (1) including the arrears, and such payment has to be made until the standard rent in relation thereto is fixed having regard to the provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontroller had jurisdiction under s. 15(3) to determine the standard rent in an application for ejectment based on the plea of non~payment of rent, if the tenant raised a contention that the contractual rent is in excess of the standard rent. The learned Judge was of the view that the language of sub-s. (3) of s. 15 covers even those cases in which an application for fixation of standard rent it made independently would be barred by time prescribed under s. 12 of the Act, since the limitation prescribed under s. 12 applies only to an application made for fixation of standard rent and not to a plea taken up by the tenant in defence to an action for his eviction under proviso (a) to sub-s. (1) of s. 14 of the Act. If the tenant deposits the arrears of rent, observed the learned Judge, but at the same time contends that the rent claimed from him is in excess of the standard rent the Controller has to go into the question of standard rent and he cannot order payment of the entire arrears of rent deposited unless he finds that the arrears so deposited are not in excess of the arrears calculated at the rate at which, the standard rent is fixed. In S.K. Chatterjee and Anr. v.J.N. Ghosha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt it is free of the limitation prescribed by s. 12. It is to be noticed that under s. 12 standard rent may be given retrospective operation for not more than one year. But if a tenant is in arrears for more than one year, on the contention advanced by counsel for Chawla the tenant would be liable to pay arrears at the rate of standard rent determined for a period longer than one year before the date on which he made a claim in his written statement for determination of standard rent and may be entitled to reopen closed transactions. The legislature could not have intended that the tenant in default should be entitled to evade the statutory period of limitation prescribed by the expedient of refusing to make an application so as to obtain an advantage to which he is not entitled if he moves the Controller in a substantive application for determination of standard rent. In our view the expression having regard to the provisions of this Act occurring in sub-s. (3) of s. 15 means having regard to sections 9 and 12 and other relevant provisions of the Act. In our view Deshpande, J., in the judgment under appeal was right in the view that he took, and that the refinement he sought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Chawla was, therefore, not entitled to claim the protection of sub-s. (2) of s. 14 for he made no payment as required by s. 15 and also because he had previously obtained the benefit of sub-s. (2) by making a deposit in the earlier proceeding. The contention of counsel for Chawla that the proceeding started by Sethi against him was dismissed and that Chawla had not obtained any benefit in respect of the premises under sub-s. (2) of s. 14 does not require serious consideration. Chawla obtained an order of disposal of the proceeding by depositing the amount ordered to be deposited by him under s. 15. That was clearly a benefit which he obtained under s. 14(2). The plea that no tenant shall be entitled to the benefit under this sub- section is only directory is without substance. In any event the High Court was of the view that having regard to the conduct of Chawla he having committed default previously and having obtained the benefit of sub-s. (2) in respect of the premises he was not entitled to the same benefit in this proceeding. Assuming that the proviso to sub-s. (2) of s. 14 is not mandatory on that question we express no opinion--we are clearly of the view that the Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
