CHUNILAL JOSHI Vs. GORA BIBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five Rules were issued at the instance of tenants against the appellate judgments in five rent fixation appeals.

(2.) It appears that two of the premises form part of a larger premises the other premises form no part of the same. The learned Rent Controller did not divide up the rent of the larger premises amongst any smaller premises but, on the other hand, strictly following Section 9(2), he compared the rent of the premises in 1941 with the present premises and arrived at the basic standard rent as required in the section. The case of Bata Shoe Company, Ltd. v. Narayan Das Mallik and Ors.,1951 88 CLJ 191 has no bearing upon the method adopted by him. That decision did not Civil Revision Case Nos. 2715, 2925-28 of 1953 delete Section 9(2). He worked out that the average rate for all the tenancies on a calculation according to Section 9(2) would work out to 1 anna 6 1/2 pies per square feet. He then compared two other exhibits, exs. C and D, relating to other previous fixation cases. The learned Judge has pointed out that they are not admissible in evidence in the present cases, according to law because statements of facts in third party judgments are not evidence.

(3.) Oral evidence was not given as regards those tenancies to enable those judgments to be used even for purposes of corroboration.