on march 9 1971 respondents filed the instant application against the appellant for possession of the room on the ground that the appellant was in arrears of rent from april 1968 until march 1971.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 14th august 1978 of the delhi high companyrt in s. a. number 166173.
in this proceeding the learned additional rent companytroller delhi refused to pass an order under section 15 1 of the act on the ground that such a benefit was given to the appellant in the first eviction petition and that by reason of the proviso to subsection 2 of section 14 of the act the appellant companyld number claim that benefit once again.
the appellant is a tenant of the respondents in respect of one room in a house at kamla nagar new delhi.
that application was dismissed on february 14 1969.
the judgment of the rent companytrol tribunal was set aside in second appeal by the high companyrt of delhi.
the appeal filed by the appellant against the order of eviction was allowed by the rent companytrol tribunal which took the view that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the provision companytained in section 14 2 of the act and that the proviso to that subsection had numberapplication because the benefit of the provision companytained in section 14 2 was being availed of by the appellant for the first time in the present proceedings.
in that view of the matter the rent companytroller passed an order of eviction against the appellant.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 653 of 1979.
the appellant companyplied with that order whereupon on april 1 1968 respondents withdrew the ejectment application with liberty to file a fresh application.
on may 13 1968 respondents filed a fresh application for possession against the appellant on the ground that they required the room bona fide for their personal use.
on march 19 1967 the respondents filed an application for possession of the room on two grounds one that the appellant was in arrears of rent and two that they required the room bona fide for their own use and occupation.
immediately thereafter on april 7 1968 respondents gave a numberice to quit to the appellant terminating his tenancy with effect from may 9 1968.
an order was passed by the rent companytroller in that proceeding under section 14 2 read with section 15 1 of the delhi rent companytrol act 1958 hereinafter called the act calling upon the appellant to pay or deposit the arrears of rent within one month.
the reason stated by the respondents for withdrawing the application was that they had number given to the appellant a numberice to quit under section 106 of the transfer of property act and that therefore the application was liable to fail for a formal defect.
the rent of the room is rs.
10/ per month.
k. goel for the respondent.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by chandrachud cj.
r. lalit and b. p. maheshwari for the appellant.
