Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.25 seconds)Section 14 in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958
Ram Murti vs Bhola Nath And Anr. on 1 May, 1984
The learned ARCT has also erred in observing that
there was no documentary evidence placed on record by the
petitioner/tenant to show that the delay in depositing the rent was not
willful. Though there was no formal application filed by the
petitioner/tenant as there was no occasion, in the absence of there
being any application under Section 15(7), but at the time of
consideration of benefit under Section 14(2), the prayer for
condonation of delay on account of delay in obtaining the certified
copy, was made before the ARC for his consideration. Thus, it could
not be said that there was neither any application nor any prayer for
condonation of delay, and so, the court could not have condoned the
same. The power of condonation of delay and also default in deposit
of rent by the tenant is well recognized by various judicial
pronouncements of the Supreme Court and reference can be again
made to the case of Ram Murti (supra).
Section 15 in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
1