SRIMATI NANIBALA DEVI Vs. BHARAMBARA BEHERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Plaintiff's revision under Section 25, provincial Small Cause Courts Act, arising out of a suit for recovery of house rent. The Plaintiffs case is that the Defendant is the tenant under hire for a very long time; the rental for the year 1950 was Rs. 3/ - p. m. in the year 1951 it was enhanced to Rs. 40/ - p. m.; it was further enhanced to Rs. 60/ - p. m. in 1952; and finally there was adjustment of accounts between the parties and the account was settled at Rs. 1,175/ - out of which there were payments made by the Defendant from time to time. After taking into account the payment, the Plaintiff has laid her claim at Rs. 450/ - towards arrear rent.

(2.) THE Defendant had denied the genuineness of the agreement and he had also taken the plea that he was not liable for the amount claimed by the Plaintiff.

(3.) MR . Sinha appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, however, has placed before me a judgment (unreported case) of the Division Bench of our Court passed in O.C. 74 of 1955. In construing the provision of Section 4 their Lordships have taken into consideration the other provisions of the Act such as Sections 5 and 6 in as much as Section 4 is always made subject to other provisions of the Act. Their Lordships came to the conclusion that in fixing the fair and equitable rent payable by the tenant, the Municipal Register, or the registers kept by any local authority cannot be conclusive and it is just one element to be taken into consideration in fixing the fair and equitable rental. The O.J.C. arose out of proceedings for fixation of fair and equitable rent. The learned S.C.C. Judge in my opinion has erred in law in coming to the conclusion that the municipal register showing the annual rental valuation of the holding is conclusive.