PREM PRAKASH Vs. KAILASH CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition for revision under Section 379, Cr.PC is directed against the order dated November 22, 1983, of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Udaipur and involves the question as to whether the complaint filed against the petitioner under Section 23(5) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (here in after referred to as 'the Act') was within limitation.

(2.) NON -petitioner Kailash Chandra was the tenant of the petitioner in respect of the premises consisting of two rooms, bath room, kitchen and a latrine. The rent of the premises was Rs. 35/ - per month which included water and electricity charges. An application under Section 12(1) of the Act was filed in the Court of City Magistrate, Udaipur, on June 10, 1982, alleging that the petitioner had cut of the amenities; i.e., supply of water to the bath room and kitchen had also dis -connected the supply of electricity to the premises. The non -petitioner prayed that the said amenities be restored to him. By the order dated June 14, 1982, the learned Magistrate directed the petitioner to file his reply and in the meanwhile, to restore the amenities. The petitioner filed his reply on June 19, 1982 and prayed that the interim order may be vacated. The non -petitioner, on the other hand, filed an application that the landlord had not restord the amenities despite the court's order. The City Magistrate on June 25, 1982, passed an order under Sub -section (6) of the Act imposing a penalty of Rs. 5/ - per day against the petitioner till he restores the amenities. On June 29, 1922, the petitioner's application for vacating the order for restoring the amenities was dismissed. Subsequently, on June 30, 1982. the learned Magistrate passed an order that the non -petitioner may himself restore the amenities and pursuant thereto, the non -petitioner got the amenities restored.

(3.) BY the order dated January 18, 1983, the Additional District Magistrate accorded permission under Section 23(5) of the Act for the prosecution of the petitioner for contravening the order made under Section 12 of the Act. The non -petitioner, then, filed a complaint in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Udaipur against the petitioner on April 16, 1983. An application was moved by the petitioner on September 27, 1983, that the complaint filed by the non -petitioner was barred by limitation under Section 23 (5) of the Act. By order dated November 22, 1983, the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the said application holding that it was not barred by limitation. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner has filed the present revision.