K RAMANATHAN DIED Vs. B K NALINI JAYANTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful tenants are the petitioners in these two civil revision petitions, which were filed against the judgment of the appellate Authority/chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, in R. C. A. Nos. 173 and 174 of 1987 dated 27. 2. 1989 fixing the fair rent to the premises of the petitioners herein at Rs. 760 per month in both the appeals, and modifying the order of the Rent Controller/9th Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, in r. C. O. P. Nos. 3384 and 3467 of 1984, who fixed the fair rent at Rs. 816 and Rs. 814 respectively.

(2.) THE respondent/landlady is the owner of the shops in question viz. , Old Door No. 94, New Door No. 144, Royapettah High Road and Old door No. 64/1 and new Door No. 181, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Madras 4. She filed petitions for fixation of fair rent. THE tenants were paying rent ranging from Rs. 75 to Rs. 90 per month per shop. It was the contention of the landlady that these shops are situated in a very important commercial locality surrounded by banks, shops, hotels, bus stand, etc. , that they are also nearer to the residential buildings, that the land would fetch Rs. 4 lakhs per ground and that therefore, the fair rent should be fixed as prayed for in her petitions.

(3.) THE Rent Control Act is a self-contained Code and the code of Civil Procedure had been made applicable only to the limited extent. Even though the Rent Controller is considered to be a Civil Court, the Code of civil Procedure do not as such apply in toto except to the extent provided by the Act itself. When the Rent Control Act is a self contained Code, the procedure to be followed has also been prescribed in the Rules. When the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable in toto, equally the Evidence Act also cannot be made applicable to the proceedings under the Rent Control Act. In fact, the Rent Controllers are held to be persona designata. THE Rent Control Act is a self contained and complete Code for the regulation of rights of landlords and tenants. In fact, in some of the cases, the Supreme Court has held that the pleadings in the Rent Control matters should be construed liberally without adhering to the principles of the Evidence Act.