CALCUTTA CHEMICALS AND LIMITED Vs. TAIYEB YUSUFBHAI VAKHARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of both the parties, the civil revision petition itself has been taken up for disposal.

(2.) THE respondents in the civil revision petition filed an application before the Rent Control Court, in R.C.O.P.No. 2954 of 1994. Under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, for determining the fair rent of the building and to fix it at Rs. 25, 482.50. THE application was opposed by the tenant/respondent. THE XVI Judge of the Small Causes Court, who held the enquiry, determined the fair rent payable for the building at Rs.11, 396 per month and passed an order accordingly, directing the tenant/respondent to pay the rent at Rs.11, 396 per month, from 5.12.1993 onwards. Aggrieved by the decision of the learned Rent Controller, the tenant preferred an appeal in RCA. No. 1313 of 1996 to the appellate authority while the landlord also preferred on appeal in 1325 of 1996. THE appellate authority, by common order dated 25.6.1998, in RCA. Nos. 1313 of 1996 and 1321 of 1996, confirmed the order of the Rent Controller, fixing the fair rent at Rs.11, 396 per month. THErefore, the tenant has come up with this revision Petition.

(3.) I find from the Order of the lower appellate authority that no plea was put forward, objecting to the maintainability of the petition under section 5 of the Act. Neither before the Rent Controller, nor before the lower appellate authority, this plea was urged for the consideration of the authorities by the tenant. Therefore, it has to be taken that this plea is raised now for the first time. It is not stated specifically in the counter filed that the petition is barred under section 5 of the Act and therefore, it is not maintainable. A vague and half-hearted averment has been made to the effect that fair rent of the building has been fixed, without giving necessary details.