KUNJIPATHUMMA Vs. OUSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C R.P. No. 1756/80 is by the landlord, and is directed against the order in R. C. R. P. 59/79 fixing the fair rent of the building in question as Rs. 115/- per mensem. And C. R. P. No 1885/80 is by the tenant who thinks that what is fixed is too high.

(2.) The building was originally a residential one. It was converted into a non residential one by providing rolling shutters and the like, and was let out in February, 1973 on a rent of Rs. 200/- per mensem. As per Ext. A1 property tax assessment register for the period 71-76, the annual rental value was Rs. 420/- only. For the subsequent period (76-81) this was enhanced to Rs. 2400/- obviously on the basis that the agreed rent from February, 1973 was Rs. 200/- per mensem.

(3.) The controversy is whether Ext. A1 could have been taken into account for fixation of fair rent under Sub-s.(2) of S.5, or whether the matter had to be dealt with under Sub-s. (3). Sub-sections (1) to (3) of S.5 of Act 2/65 read:-