V K NARASIMHAM Vs. PKPADMANABHA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari with the object of quashing an order passed by the Collector of Madras under Clause 7-A of the Madras House Rent Control Order, 1941. It is clear that the petitioner has misread the effect of that clause.

(2.) On the 16 August, 1942, the petitioner became a tenant of the first respondent in respect of a house known as No. 46, Sullivan's Garden Road, Mylapore, Madras, on a monthly rent of Rs. 30. On the 1 August, 1943, the petitioner agreed to the rent being increased to Rs. 35 a month, and on the 1 April, 1944, he agreed to an increase to Rs. 40 a month. On the 24 July, 1944, the first respondent wrote to the petitioner giving notice that he required a rent of Rs. 60 a month. The petitioner refused to agree to this and contended that he was entitled to remain in possession of the house at a rent of Rs. 30 per month, the rent which he was paying when the Madras House Rent Control Order was applied to the City of Madras. On this basis he claimed to be entitled to recover from his landlord Rs. 10 a month in respect of April, May and June, 1944 and suggested that the Rs. 30 should be credited to the rent due in respect of the month of July.

(3.) In these circumstances the first respondent applied to the Controller for an order of eviction of the petitioner on the ground that he was not willing to pay the fair rent for the premises. There had been no application for the fixing of the fair rent, and consequently it was necessary for the Controller to decide what the fair rent was. He found that the municipal valuation for the year 1939-40 and preceding years had been based on a monthly rental of Rs. 60 but that owing to deterioration in the premises the valuation was reduced in respect of the year 1943-44. It was then based on a monthly rental of Rs. 40. The Controller considered that the fair rent would be Rs. 50 a month and directed the petitioner to pay rent at this rate from the 1 October, 1944, failing which he was to be evicted from the premises. Both the parties appealed to the Collector who fixed the fair rent at Rs. 60 a month. It is that order which the petitioner challenges in these proceedings.