RAMKUMAR GOURISHANKAR Vs. BHOLANATH GOPIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to these two Petitioners are simple. The Petitioner, Ramkumar Gourishankar owns a house which was let out to the opposite party, Bholanath Gopiram, on a monthly rental of Rs. 46/ -. He applied to the House Rent Controller for determination of fair and equitable rent, under Section 6 of the Orissa House Rent Control Act, read with Sub -section (b) of Section 7 of the Act. The Controller fixed the rent at Rs. 70/ - per month by his order dated 17 -11.48. Both parties preferred appeals to the District Collector against this order. The appeal preferred by Ramkumar Gourishankar (Petitioner) was numbered as H.R.C. Appeal No. 151 of 1948, while that preferred by Bholanath Gopiram (opposite party) was numbered as H.R.C. Appeal No. 157 of 1948. The District Collector, by an order dated 13 -1 -49, confirmed the order of the House Rent Controller, in the absence of the opposite party; but on the application of the opposite party on 31 -1 -49, the District Collector reheard the appeals, after hearing both parties, and passed an order in both the appeals, whereby he reversed the order of the House Rent Controller.

(2.) MR . B.N. Mohanty, learned Counsel appearing for the landlord Petitioner raises three points before me:

(3.) IT is admitted that the opposite party was in occupation of the house at the time of the commencement of the Orissa Rent House Control Act (Act V of 1947). Section 5 of the Act expressly provides that where the tenant, on a tenancy from month to month is on the date of commencement of this Act is in possession of any house the land lord shall not be entitled to increase the rent, which was on the date of commencement of this Act payable for such house. The Legislature has thus put an express limitation on the power of the landlord to claim a rent higher than what he was getting at the date of commencement of the Act. Mr. Mohanty relied upon the language of Sections 6 and 7.