Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between a tenant and landlord regarding the validity of a rent deposit made by the tenant under Section 6A of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973. The tenant filed an application on 19.5.1988, asserting that the landlord refused to accept rent and issue receipts, leading to the deposit of Rs. 7500 for the period from 12.2.1987 to 11.5.1988. The Rent Controller initially ruled that the deposit was not valid due to the tenant's failure to pay interest and costs, while the appellate authority and High Court disagreed, upholding the tenant's position. The Supreme Court examined the provisions of Section 6A and clarified that there was no requirement for the tenant to pay interest and costs at the time of deposit. The court concluded that the tenant's deposit was valid, and the ejectment application filed by the landlord was improperly allowed. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the lower courts.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Validity of Rent Deposit - Tenant's deposit under Section 6A deemed valid despite non-payment of interest and costs - Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, Section 6A - The court held that the requirement of paying interest and costs was not applicable under Section 6A, thus the tenant's deposit was valid and the ejectment application was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the amount deposited by the tenant under Section 6A was a valid tender.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the appellate authority and High Court that the tenant's deposit was valid under Section 6A of the Act.
Law Points
- Validity of rent deposit
- Rent Controller's authority
- Ejectment application
- Section 6A of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act
- 1973
- Requirement of interest and costs
