House Rent Control Act, 1991
Section 15
The plaintiff wanted to increase the rent from July, 1995, defendants did not comply and the plaintiff did not take rent when the defendants tendered the rent for the month of July, 1995 and the defendant thereafter did not pay rent and became defaulter. Rent Control being Rent Control Case. Md. Layek Khan vs. Abdul Latif (Md. Abdul Aziz J) (Civil) 6 ADC 668
Section 19 read with
Baribhara Niyantron Ain [III of 1991]
Section 19
Deposit of rent with the rent controller depends upon certain contingencies and unless those contingencies arise a tenant is not entitled to deposit rent with the Rent Controller.
The High Court Division held that the provision of section 19 of the premises a Control Ordinance, 1963 and provision section 19 of Baribhara Niyantron Ain, 1991 are almost same. There are some contingencies attached to the provisions section 18-19 of the Baribhara Niyantran Ain, 1991. The petitioner has failed to establish any of the contingencies upon which he would be allowed to deposit the rent with Rent Controller. In absence of any such contingencies there is no scope to allow a tenant to deposit the rent with Rent Controller. In that view of the matter, the High Court Division does not find illegality in the impugned judgment and order and Rule has got no merit. In the result, the Rule is discharged..(11 & 12) [2022] 24 ALR (HCD) 39