TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (7) TMI 1315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act is not entitled to such benefit in case if it is held to be a second default. 4. The facts are not in dispute. The respondent is a tenant in respect of the suit premises. As noted herein earlier, it is not disputed that the respondent has already availed of the benefit ofSection 14(2) read with Section 15 of the Act pursuant to an order dated 3rd of December, 2001 passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi in Eviction Case No. E-105 of 1999. At the present juncture, it may be mentioned that the appellants is now facing the charge of committing second default in payment of rent to the appellants in respect of the suit premises. It is also not in dispute that a demand notice dated 31st of March, 2003 was served by the appellants upon the respondent intimating that the respondent was in arrears of rent for three consecutive months from January, 2003 onwards. It is also not in dispute that on receipt of the said demand notice from the appellants, the respondent had sent the arrears of rent for three months for the period from 1st of January, 2003 to 31st of March, 2003 by a money order dated 22nd of April, 2003. It is also not in dispute that the appellants had refu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he tenant had not made any deposit and it was not his case that the arrears stood paid to the landlord. The High Court further held that in the present case, the tenant/respondent had tendered the rent by money order, which the landlord admittedly had refused to receive. So far as the interpretation of Section 27 read with Section 14(1) (a) of the Act is concerned, the High Court said that this Section clearly says that the tenant would be entitled to protection if he either pays or tenders the arrears of rent within two months of the service of demand. That is to say, the tenant was required to either tender or pay the rent to earn protection. While interpreting the word "Neither" and "Nor", the High Court observed that these words leave no manner of doubt that if there was a valid tender of rent within two months of the notice of demand, the tenant would be protected. 5. In this way, the High Court had observed that it was not the case of a second default and therefore reversed the order of the Rent Control Tribunal and directed that no order of eviction could be passed as this was not a case of second default. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We have a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tained such benefit once in respect of any premises, he again makes a default in the payment of rent of those premises for three consecutive months. Section 15 of the Act runs as under :- Section 15 - When a tenant can get the benefit of protection against eviction (1) In every proceeding of the recovery of possession of any premises on the 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 up to 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. (2) If, in any proceeding for the recovery of possession of any premises on any ground other than that referred to in sub-sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd proceed with the hearing of the application. 7. Chapter IV of the Act deals with Deposit of Rent. Section 26 of the Act clearly says that if rent is paid, receipt of the same must be given by the landlord. Now, the important Section is Section 27 of the Act, which runs as under :- 8. Section 27 - Deposit of rent by the tenant (1) Where the landlord does not accept any rent tendered by the tenant within the lime referred to in section 26 of refuses or neglects to deliver a receipt referred to therein or where there is a bona fide doubt as to the person or persons to whom the rent is payable, the tenant may deposit such rent with the Controller in the prescribed manner: [Provided that in cases where there is a bona fide doubt as to the person or persons to whom the rent is payable, the tenant may remit such rent to the Controller by postal money order.] (2) The deposit shall be accompanied by an application by the tenant containing the following particulars, namely: -- (a) the premises for which the rent is deposited with a description sufficient for identifying the premises; (b) the period for which the rent is deposited; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tenant as compensation." 9. Relying on the aforesaid decision, which has been explained by the High Court in the impugned order namely Atmaram's Case (Supra), learned counsel Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta contended that in view of the mandatory provisions under Section 27 of the Act, which clearly says that if the rent is refused to be accepted by the landlord and as the procedure to be adopted by the tenant for payment of rent has been specifically provided in Section 27 of the Act and that procedure was not followed by the appellants after refusal by the landlord to accept the rent for the aforesaid period, that is to say, after such refusal, the tenant had not deposited the rent in compliance with Section 27 of the Act with the Rent Controller, it must be held that the tenant had defaulted in payment of rent by not depositing the rent, therefore it was a case of second default which entails the tenant of eviction. Strong reliance once again was placed by the learned counsel for the appellants on the decision in Atmaram's case (Supra). 10. Mr.Gandhi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, however, refuted the submission made by the learned counsel for the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he date of which a notice of payment of the arrears of rent has been served on him by the landlord in the manner provided in Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. A plain reading of sub-section (2) of Section 14 makes it clear that a tenant is protected from eviction if he makes payment or deposits the rent as required by Section 15. Section 15 deals with cases when a tenant can get the benefit of protection against eviction. 14. Accordingly, Section 14(1)(a) is a ground for eviction of a tenant for default in payment of rent. In spite of that, protection has been given under Section 15 of the Act to the tenant to avail of the protection given by the Legislature by depositing rent in the manner indicated in Section 15 of the Act. However, proviso to Section 14(2) of the Act takes away the right of a tenant of the benefit of Sub-Section (2) of Section 14 if the tenant having obtained such benefit once in respect of any premises and makes a further default in payment of rent of those premises for three consecutive months. Therefore, it has been made clear that when the tenant makes a second default, no protection can be given to the tenant from eviction. 15. Chapte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er. When the words " bona fide doubt" has been added to Section 27, the tenant may remit such rent to the Controller by postal money order. From a conjoint reading of this provision referred to herein above and particularly Section 27 of the Act, in our view, it cannot be doubted that the procedure having been made by the Legislature how the rent can be deposited if it was refused to have been received or to grant receipt for the same. If that be the position, if such protection has been given to the tenant, the said procedure has to be strictly followed in the matter of taking steps in the event of refusal of the landlord to receive the rent or to grant receipt to the tenant. It is well settled that whether the word "may" shall be used as "shall", would depend upon the intention of the Legislature. It is not to be taken that once the word "may" is used by the Legislature in Section 27 of the Act, would not mean that the intention of the Legislature was only to show that the provisions under Section 27 of the Act was directory but not mandatory. 16. In other words, taking into consideration the object of the Act and the intention of the Legislature and in view of the discussions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct matter and object of the statutory provision in question in determining whether the same is mandatory or directory. No universal principle of law could be laid in that behalf as to whether a particular provision or enactment shall be considered mandatory or directory. It is the duty of Court to try to get at the real intention of the Legislature by carefully analysing the whole scope of the statute or section or a phrase under Consideration. As stated earlier, the question as to whether the statute is mandatory or directory depends upon the intent of the Legislature and not always upon the language in which the intent is couched. The meaning and intention of the Legislature would govern design and purpose the Act seeks to achieve. In "Sutherland Statutory Construction" (3rd Edn) Volume I at page 81 in paragraph 316, it is stated that although the problem of mandatory and directory legislation is a hazard to all governmental activity, it is peculiarly hazardous to administrative agencies because the validity of their action depends upon exercise of authority in accordance with their charter of existence the statute. If the directions of the statute are mandatory, then strict comp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the landlord or his authorized agent a written receipt for the amount paid to him, signed by the landlord or his authorized agent. It is also open to the tenant to remit the rent to his landlord by postal money order. The relevant part of Section 27 of the Act reads as under:- "27. Deposit of rent by the tenant - (1) Where the landlord does not accept any rent tendered by the tenant within the time referred to in Section 26 or refuses or neglects to deliver a receipt referred to therein or where there is a bona fide doubt as to the person or persons to whom the rent is payable, the tenant may deposit such rent with the Controller in the prescribed manner : Provided that in cases where there is a bona fide doubt as to the person or persons to whom the rent is payable, the tenant may remit such rent to the Controller by postal money order." 21. This Court in the aforesaid decision, after examining Section 27 of the Act observed at paragraph 21 as follows :- "The Act, therefore, prescribes what must be done by a tenant if the landlord does not accept rent tendered by him within the specified period. He is required to deposit the rent in the Court of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....count of refusal of the landlords to accept the rent sent by way of money orders that the tenant was driven to move the Court for permission to deposit the arrears of rent. Since there is a substantial compliance of Section 8 in as much as the arrears of rent stand deposited in Court, a strict or technical view ought not to have been taken by the High Court. We are unable to accept this contention advanced on behalf of the appellants by the learned counsel. The rent legislation is normally intended for the benefit of the tenants. At the same time, it is well-settled that the benefits conferred on the tenants through the relevant statues can be enjoyed only on the basis of strict compliance with the statutory provisions. Equitable consideration have no place in such matters. The statute contains express provisions. It prescribes various steps which a tenant is required to take. In Section 8 of the Act, the procedure to be followed by the tenant is given step by step. An earlier step is a pre-condition for the next step. The tenant has to observe the procedure as prescribed in the statute. A strict compliance with the procedure is necessary. The tenant cannot straight away jump to th....