MESSRS KISHORI LAL PREM NATH Vs. VED PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 11-8-1982 Kishori Lal Prem Nath (hereinafter called 'the tenant'), filed an application under section 4 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act'), against Banwari Lal (for short 'the landlords'), for fixation of fair rent of the shop No. 68 in Grain Market Moga Mandi. It was pleaded that he was in occupation of a portion of the shop at the rate of Rs. 850/- per annum. According to the tenant the annual rent of the entire shop was Rs. 300/- in the year 1938-39 and for the portion in occupation of the tenant, the annual rent came to Rs. 75/- whereas the landlords were charging Rs. 850/-. It was also pleaded that the fair rent of Rs. 850/- fixed by the Rent Controller, by order dated 11.11.1963, at which rate the rent was being charged by the landlords is not binding on him since that fair rent was fixed by compromise and in law fair rent cannot be fixed on the basis of compromise

(2.) THE landlords contested the application and pleaded that the tenant was in occupation of a portion of the shop measuring 80 ft x 20 ft and for that portion the Rent Controller had rightly fixed Rs. 850/- per annum as the fair rent, which binds the parties. It was also pleaded that the fresh application for fixation of fair rent was not maintainable in view of section 14 of the Act.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved the landlords went up in appeal. The Appellate Authority vide order dated 27th July, 1978 came to the conclusion that both the parties have failed to adduce evidence to enable the Court to fix basic rent. The evidence led by the parties was not held to be sufficient in doing so because the instances did not relate to instances of same accommodation and in similar circumstances. Accordingly, after taking notice of certain decisions of this Court, the Appellate Authority relying on the agreed basic annual rent of Rs. 567/-, as was agreed between the parties before the Rent Controller, on the basis of which, fair rent was fixed by order dated 11th November, 1963 (Exhibit A5), the basic rent was fixed as the fair. Both the sides felt aggrieved from the aforesaid order. The landlords have filed Civil Revision No. 1767 of 1978 whereas the tenant has filed Civil Revision No. 1767 of 1978 whereas the tenant has filed Civil Revision No. 1645 of 1978. Since they arise out of the same proceedings, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.