Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.21 seconds)

Smt. Lalita Rani vs Shri R.K. Gandhi (Deceased Through Lrs) on 30 August, 2012

37. However, as per the provisions of of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, in case a tenant is evicted for non­payment of rent under Section 14(1)(a) of of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, he has to be given a chance for payment of arrears of rent so as to enable him to avail the benefit under Section 14(2) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. As per the case of the petitioner, the rent has not been paid since March, 2002 and legal demand notice is dated 17.7.2006. It is settled law that even for the purpose of Section 14(1)(a) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, a landlord can claim only legally recoverable rent and rent which is barred by limitation cannot be claimed by the landlord. Reference in this regard may be made to the cases of Kamala Bakshi Vs. Khairati Lal 2000 (1) RCR (Rent) 400 (SC), Hari Shanker Saxena Vs. Sarla Devi & Ors. 1970 RCR 36, Satyendra Kumar Vs. Ramchandra Murthy 1975 RCR 320, Mankunwar Bai Vs. Sunderlal Jain 1978 (1) RCJ 249, Daulat Ram Vs. Som Nath 1981 (1) RCJ 220 (Delhi) wherein it has been observed as under :­ "The expression 'legally recoverable' means rent for the recovery of which there is no legal bar. One such bar may be the expiry of the period of limitation, as the expiry of the period of limitation E.No.1262/2006 Page No. 31 of 34 prescribed by law bars the recovery of the said amount. Therefore, it has to be held that the words 'arrears of rent legally recoverable' means arrears of rent which are not barred by limitation."
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1