that the defendant collected the rents therefor as agent for his son.
The complaint further alleges that the defendant has refused to make refund to the tenants of the amounts due them under the Area Rent Director's retroactive order, which amounts total $ 249. Defendant does not deny the failure to make such refunds. Therefore, he must be held to have committed a violation of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, supra.
The defendant's answer pleads certain matters which, although they do not constitute a defense to the present action, might be considered in mitigation of damages. The Court feels that the discretion vested in it in assessing damages, under Section 205(e) of the Act, may best be exercised after the Court has had an opportunity to consider evidence relating to the question of damages.
Judgment may be entered for the plaintiff, provided, however, that the case may proceed to trial, limited to the issue of the amount of damages recoverable by plaintiff from defendant.