INDIAN DUPLICATOR COMPANY LIMITED Vs. VATSALABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE made returnable forthwith and heard by consent.

(2.) BY this writ petition the order passed by the Additional Collector dated 29th June, 1998 in Appeal No. 119/a-71 (1) 93-94, is subject matter of challenge. Briefly stated respondent No. 1 is landlord in respect of the suit property. Respondent No. 1 sent notice to the petitioner asking to increase the rent from Rs. 2400 p. m. to Rs. 14,000/- p. m. The said request is not accepted by the petitioner which compelled the respondent No. 1 to file the application before the Rent Controller for fixation of fair rent. The parties, besides filing their pleadings, adduced evidence in support of their stand. The Rent Controller by the order dated 31st January, 1994 was pleased to allow the application and that the fair rent of the suit premises was fixed at Rs. 6/- per sq. ft. under Clause 5 of the C. P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short "the Rent Control Order"), with effect from December, 1989. The Rent Controller further ordered that the rent fixed above will be exclusive of the corporation taxes which were to be borne by the petitioner and the said order was to be made applicable from the date of filing of the application before the Rent Controller. Against the said decision the petitioner took up the matter in appeal before the Additional Collector. The Additional Collector by the impugned order dated 29th June, 1998 was pleased to dismiss the appeal.

(3.) THE grievance made in the present petition is that although the petitioner had led evidence, both the Courts below have not discussed the evidence, other than the one in the case of State Bank of India, while considering the claim regarding fixation of fair rent. It is, therefore, submitted that the Courts below have committed an error in deciding the matter solely on the basis of the decision in some other case between some other parties and which is not related to the suit property. Moreover, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner no attempt has been made by the Courts below to find out whether the judgment in the said case was a comparable instance.