CHEDALAL Vs. BHOLARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The only question that arises in this application in revision is whether the 'standard rent' of the premises in question could be determined by a criminal Court under S. 13 of Central Act XIX [19] of 1947, when it does not stand determined by a civil Court under S. 7 of the Act. The complaint against the landlord was that he had charged rent in excess of the 'standard rent.' The 'standard rent,' in my opinion, could only be determined by a civil Court and not by a criminal Court. Of course, no cognizance of the offence could have been taken after three months of the date of the commission thereof under S. 13 (4) of the Act. It has been argued that no civil Court could ordinarily be expected to give a decision in a case within three months of the commission of the offence. The beat procedure in that case would have been to file a complaint against the landlord in a criminal Court for having charged rent in excess of the 'standard rent' under S. 13 of the Act and also a suit against the landlord in a civil Court for fixation of the 'standard rent' under S. 7 of the Act. The criminal Court in that case could have well been requested to stay the proceedings till the disposal of the civil suit. In the present case no civil suit appears to have been filed for fixation of the 'standard rent' under S. 7 of the Act and, in the circumstances, the criminal Court could not possibly itself have determined the 'standard rent' and disposed of the criminal case under S. 13 of the Act.

(3.) The application in revision accordingly is allowed, the order of the trial Court is set aside and the proceedings are directed to be quashed in entirety.