SHIVAJI RAO TAMBAT Vs. PARWAT KANNOJIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 227 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is incumbent upon the trial Court, in cases under the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, to decide the provisional rent under the provisions of Sec. 13(2) of the Act where the rate of rent is disputed but in the present case, since the trial Court has not decided the provisional rent, an application under Sec. 13(6) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act was filed by him, which was rejected vide order dtd. 30/10/2023. Since the provisional rent has not been decided under Sec. 13(2) of the M.P. Accommodation Act; therefore, he has filed an application for deciding it but that application has also been rejected vide order dtd. 13/3/2024 observing that the plaintiff ought to get decide the provisional rent from RAC (Rent Control Act) and it is also observed that the authority to determine the rent lies only with the RCA. There is no provision in the Act, 1961 for ascertainment of rent by the Court. This observation is erroneous.; therefore, he prays for setting aside the impugned order and under the application under Sec. 13(2) of the Act.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for respondent submits that though he is under obligation to deposit the rent but the amount of provisional rent would be first decided by the learned Trial Court under the provisions of Sec. 13(2) of the Act, 1961 and after deciding such rent, he is under obligation to pay it. Thereafter, in case of any default, the plaintiff would be entitled to file an application under Sec. 13(6) of the Act. The learned Trial Court has rightly rejected the application.