MOHAMMAD MUSHTAQUE Vs. JAMA MASJID COMMITTEE SAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Misc. Appeals are directed against the common impugned order dated 26th Marh, 1996 by District Judge, Sagar. Since similar questions are involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE facts no longer in dispute are that the appellants of all the appeals are tenants of the respondent - Jama Masjid Committee in different suit-shops. It is also not in dispute that the suit-property is Wakf Property. The initial rent of each suit-shop was Rs. 40. 00 per month which was agreed by the parties to be increased to Rs. 180. 00 per month. The appellants filed an application under Section 10 of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act' for short) before the Rent Controlling Authority, Sagar, for fixation of standard rent of the suit-shops, The Rent Controlling Authority, Sagar by its order dated 1-10-92 fixed the standard rent of each of the suit-shop at Rs. 54. 00 per month. The present respondents preferred appeals under Section 31 of the 'act' before the District Judge, Sagar against the order of Rent Controlling Authority. The District Judge, Sagar by the impugned order allowed all the appeals and directed that the present appellants/tenants are liable to pay the agreed rent of Rs. 180. 00 per month.

(3.) IT may be noticed in the above connection that the petitions under Section 10 of the 'act' were filed before the Rent Controlling Authority somewhere in the year 1988. Thereafter, during the pendency of the said petitions before the Rent Controlling Authority and before it passed the order dated 1-10-92 fixing standard rent, the State Government issued notification No. F-24- (4)-83-XXXII-I, dated the 7th September, 1989 whereby properties owned by the Wakf were exempted from the applicability of all the provisions of the 'act'. The District Judge in the impugned order observed that after the issuance of notification as above, the Rent Controlling Authority, Sagar ceased to have jurisdiction to fix standard rent and, therefore, he was not legally competent to pass the order fixing standard rend. It was, therefore, held by the District Judge, that the present appellants/tenants shall be liable to pay the agreed rent of the suit-shops.