KAILASH CHANDER JAIN Vs. MOOL CHAND SONDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mool Raj, landlord respondent, filed an application under Section 4 of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, for fixation of fair rent of the premises in dispute which consists of a Chobara constructed in the year 1972 and was rented out to the tenant on 19th March, 1972, for a period of 11-1/2 months at a monthly rent of Rs. 75/- vide rent note deted Exhibit A-1. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant he took up a plea that the premises in disputed were leased out to him by the landlord at a monthly rent of Rs. 50/-, he denied having executed any rent note as alleged and pleaded by the landlord. He further asserted that the landlord is not at all entitled to increase the rent of the disputed Chobara in any circumstances. On the pleadings of the parties the Rent Controller framed the following issues :-

(2.) Under issue No. 1 the Rent Controller found that basic rent of the disputed Chobara is the rent prevailing for similar buildings at the time of the institution of the suit, i.e., November, 1977. For that purpose on the evidence led by the landlord it was found that Rs. 127/- p.m. is the rent of the identical Chobara adjoining the disputed property. Consequently it was held that the landlord is entitled to get the fair rent of disputed Chobara fixed and the fair rent thereof is Rs. 125/- p.m. In appeal the learned Appellate Authority affirmed these findings of the Rent Controller. Dissatisfied with the same the tenant has come up in this revision in this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner contended in the first instance that proper court-fee of Rs. 50/- was not paid on the application for fixation of fair rent and, therefore, the application as such is not maintainable. However, no such objection was taken before the Rent Controller and, therefore, he cannot be allowed to take this objection for the first-time in this petition. In any case, if proper court-fee was not paid and had this been brought to the notice of the Rent Controller, the landlord could be directed to make up the deficiency.