RAMNATH SINGH Vs. SANJAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question involved in the case is whether the Rent Controlling Authority has power to review its order?

(2.) 1989 MPLJ 750. The only question involved in the present case is whether the Rent Controlling Authority exercising the powers of execution under Section 35 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has jurisdiction to review its orders. The Rent Controlling Authority has held that the power of review is not vested with the Rent Controlling Authority as he is exercising the powers under the provincial Small Cause Courts Act. Learned counsel for the non -applicants submitted that under the provisions of Small Cause Court Act there is no provision for review. The law nowhere lays down for review of an order passed in execution proceedings. Section 35 of the Act is reproduced as under : -

(3.) LOOKING at the facts of the case and the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ridhkaran Patni (supra) the authority cannot delay the proceedings for fixation of standard rent. The standard rent would mean rent agreed between the parties. The rate of rent was not disputed. Under Section 23 -D of the Act the requirement before eviction is the payment of amount of compensation equally to double the amount of standard rent where the accommodation has, for a period of ten complete years immediately preceding the date on which the landlord files application for possession been used for business purpose and in other cases the amount of annual standard rent. The standard rent between the parties is Rs. 65/ - per month and there is no necessity to determine the standard rent. The Rent Controlling Authority is, therefore, directed to pass appropriate orders directing deposit of compel station on the basis l of monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 65/ - per month and immediately on deposits of the amount warrant for eviction be issued without any delay.