ROHIT KUMAR Vs. SHRI RAJESH KR. GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 27.7.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge VII, Ranchi in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 5 of 2007 allowing the petition filed on behalf of the landlord- respondents under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (B.B.C. Act in short) and directing the tenants-petitioners to deposit the arrears and current rent Rs. 50,000/- per month from the date of institution of the suit i.e. 19.12.2007.

(2.) Mr. Delip Jerath, learned counsel appearing for the tenants submitted as follows: The tenants filed an application on 7.5.2007 before the Sub- Divisional Officer cum House Rent Controller, Ranchi (HRC for short) for fixation of fair rent for the premises in question which was registered as B.B.C. Case No. 15 of 2007 in which by order dated 3.9.2007, the rent was fixed at Rs. 30,000/- per month and on 23.11.2007 the tenants were directed to deposit the said rent in Court in B. B. C. Case No. 40 of 2007 which was deposited. The present suit was filed on 19.12.2007 by the landlords in which the said application under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act was filed to which the tenants filed rejoinder. Relying on the judgment Arun Kumar Agrawal and Ors. v. Gaurav Krishna Sahaya and Ors.,1999 3 PLJR 120, and Syed Abid Imam v. Sharafat Hussain, 1998 2 PLJR 619, he submitted that the fair rent fixed by HRC before filing of the suit i.e. Rs. 30,000/- per month, has to be treated as the rent last paid in terms of Section 15 of the Act.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. Lal appearing for the landlords supported the impugned order. He submitted that an appeal against the said order of HRC being Appeal No. 35 R 15 of 2007-08 is pending before the appellate authority, and therefore, it cannot be said that the fixation of fair rent by HRC has attained finality and therefore, the said judgments are not applicable in this case. He further submitted that admittedly a lease agreement was entered into between the parties w.e.f. 1.6.2005, with agreed rent Rs. 50,000/- per month with stipulation of 15% enhancement after each three years. An amount of Rs. three lacs was paid by the tenants as security/advance which stood adjusted upto November 2005, as no rent was paid by the tenants after taking the property on lease. Ultimately, the suit was filed on the ground of default, personal necessity and breach of terms of tenancy. He referred to the following portion of the paragraph 9 and paragraph 13 of the rejoinder filed by the tenants to the petition filed on behalf of the landlords under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act :