Taruna Gangwal (Smt.) vs Radhey Shyam Meratwal on 27 May, 2003
5. Mr. A.K. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously argued that the trial court has not considered the matter in the right perspective. In order to strike out defence against eviction, the conduct of the defendant must be contumacious which means willfull, stubborn and disobedient. According to him, the delay in payment of rent for most of the months was for a period of less than 15 days which could be and ought to have been condoned. He has also contended that if the security amount deposited with the plaintiff is adjusted against the rent due for a months no default survives because the rent deposited late may be treated to be advance rent for the subsequent months Relying upon Roop Narain v. Murti Mandir Sita Ramji (1), J.K. Motors and Ors. v. Bhagwati Narain (2) and Jamna Lal v. Kanhaiya Lal (3), he has contended that delay in depositing of rent should be condoned liberally. According to him, rent for the months of April, 1997 and August, 1997 was deposited with the delay of only 6 days and 1 day respectively. Which could be and ought to have been condoned.