AUTAR SINGH Vs. SOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision application against an order passed by the District Judge, Jammu in a Rent Control matter. The facts giving rise to the present revision may be summarized as follows.

(2.) The petitioner Autar Singh was a lessee of a shop in Bazar Babrian Jummu from one Sohan Lal at a fixed rent of Rs. 9/- per month. Subsequently on being persuaded by the landlord, the petitioner executed a rent deed in his favour enhancing the rent to Rs. 35/- per month. The petitioner then applied to the Rent Controller Jammu on 23.10.1962 for fixation of rent. In this proceeding, however, the parties arrived at a compromise and an agreed rent of Rs. 25/- per month was fixed as fair rent for the premises. Thereafter the petitioner continued paying rent at the agreed rate. On 30.10.64 the petitioner made another application to the Rent Controller for re-fixation of fair rent. This application was resisted by the landlord firstly on the ground that the application was barred by the principle of res judicata and secondly on the ground that having agreed to pay a particular rent the petitioner was estopped from asking the Controller to reassess the rent. The petitioner, however, contended before the Controller that as the previous order was passed on the basis of the agreement of the parties and the court did not go into the various factors mentioned in Section 8(1) of the Act, there was no estoppel against the express provisions of the statute. The Rent Controller, however, overruled the plea of the petitioner and held that the rent already fixed could not be disturbed. The petitioner then went up in appeal to the District Judge who upheld the order of the Rent Controller and dismissed the appeal.

(3.) The civil revision application was in the first instance heard by a Division Bench, which referred it to a Full Bench in view of a substantial question of law of great public importance being involved in the case.