MANMOHAN SINGH Vs. NAJAKAT ALI KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are tenant in respect of residential premises. Respondent claims to be the landlord of the said premises. He filed an application under Sec. 21(1)(a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (from hereinafter referred to as "Act No. 13 of 1972") seeking release of the said premises. The release application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority vide judgment and order dtd. 3/11/2018. Petitioners filed an appeal under Sec. 22 of Act No. 13 of 1972, which is pending before District Judge, Nainital. Before the appellate court, petitioners filed an application for issuing a Commission. The said application was rejected by learned appellate court vide order dtd. 29/4/2019 with cost of Rs.1.00 lakh. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this Court against the order dtd. 29/4/2019.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his challenge only to imposition of cost of Rs.1.00 lakh upon the petitioners. According to him, costs can be imposed only in situations contemplated under Sec. 35-A and 35-B of Code of Civil Procedure, which according to him is not the case here. He further submits that while exercising power under Act No.13 of 1972, cost can be imposed by the District Judge only under Sec. 34(1)(e) of the Act, which reads as under:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners then submits that since no rules have been framed for imposition of costs or special costs in terms of Sec. 34(1) (e) of Act No. 13 of 1972, therefore, the Appellate Court/District Judge, Nainital was not justified in imposing exemplary cost upon the petitioners. He further submits that Appellate Court has requested the District Magistrate to recover the amount of costs as arrears of land revenue in case petitioners fail to deposit the same within thirty days. This, according to learned counsel for the petitioners is impermissible in view of the provision contained in Sec. 34(3) of Act No. 13 of 1972, which provides that for recovery of costs, a party has to approach the Court of Small Causes.