Deposit compliance and credible proof of payment govern rent default findings under rent control law.

Readiness and willingness to pay rent under the rent control statute required compliance with the court's direction to deposit the determined rent within the time allowed. The tenant failed to make that statutory deposit and could not rely on later payments made under a stay order to displace the finding of default. Once the defence was struck out, the tenant was limited to testing the landlord's evidence and could not adduce his own evidence; the landlord's witness was found credible and the arrears finding was supported by the record. Unverified account entries were insufficient to prove payment, as the books were not shown to be regularly kept. The eviction decree was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the decree for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent could be sustained when the tenant's defence had been struck out and the tenant claimed readiness and willingness to pay rent on the basis of deposits made during the appeal.

Analysis: Readiness and willingness under the rent control statute had to be shown by compliance with the court's direction to deposit the determined rent within the time allowed. The tenant did not deposit the amount ordered under the relevant sub-section and, therefore, could not rely on later deposits made under the stay order to negate default. Even after the defence was struck out, the tenant could only test the landlord's evidence and could not lead evidence of his own; the landlord's witness was found reliable, and the finding of arrears was supported by the record. The alleged entries in the tenant's books of account were held unreliable because the books were not shown to have been regularly kept, and mere entries were insufficient to prove payment.

Conclusion: The finding of default was upheld and the decree for eviction was sustained against the tenant.

---