In Brief
The Supreme Court examined whether a Rent Controller's discretion to strike out a tenant's defence for alleged non-payment of rent must be exercised judiciously or is mandatory. Reversing the High Court's judgment, the Court held that Section 15(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 grants discretionary (not mandatory) power. The Controller may strike out defence only upon deliberate, contumacious default, not mere technical non-compliance. The Court found the appellants-tenants had paid all arrears and subsequent rent on time, depositing advance rent exceeding the liability, demonstrating no wilful misconduct. The defence-striking order was set aside as not exercised with due circumspection, and the eviction petition was remitted for expeditious decision on merits within one year.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.