Judgment 1 wp2756.08.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2756 OF 2008
Punjab National Bank,
A Body Corporate constituted under the
Banking Companies (Acquisition of
Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its
Registered Office at 7, Bhikaji Cama
Palace, New Delhi through its Branch
Manager, Punjab National Bank,
Gandhibagh, Nagpur. .... PETITIONER.
// VERSUS //
1. Smt. Aminabai W/o. Sheikh Mohsinbhai
(Dead) by Legal Representatives :
1. Zoeb S/o. Mohsinbhai Amin,
Aged Major, Occ. Business,
2. Jabir S/o. Mohsin bhai Amin,
Aged Major, Occ. Business,
3. Zaminbhai S/o. Mohsinbhai Amin,
Aged Major, Occ. Business,
4. Juzerbhai S/o. Mohsinbhai Amin,
Aged Major, Occ. Business,
5. Zejrabai w/o. Abdul Hussain Haidi,
Aged Major, Occ. Household,
6. Rizwana w/o. Hakumiddinbhai
Calcuttawala, Aged Major,
Occ. Household,
7. Zubedabai W/o. Saituddinbhai Fidvi,
Aged : Major, Occ. Household.
All residents of Chhaoni, Sadar, Nagpur.
.... RESPONDENTS
.
::: Uploaded on - 13/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 21:08:23 :::
Judgment 2 wp2756.08.odt
___________________________________________________________________
Shri A.C.Dharmadhikari, Advocate for Petitioner.
None for the Respondents.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : MARCH 27, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. The petitioner Bank (tenant) has challenged the orders passed by the subordinate authorities fixing the fair rent under Clauses 4 and 5 of Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rent Control Order, 1949").
3. The petitioner bank occupied about 2000 sq.ft. on first floor of the building owned by the respondents/ landlord, as per the agreement dated 7 th December, 1976, the rent being 0.80ps per sq.ft. The landlord filed application under Clauses 4 and 5 of the Rent Control Order, 1949 praying that the fair rent of the premises be fixed at Rs.10/- per sq.ft. The House Rent Controller by the order passed on 29 th March, 2005 partly accepted the claim of the landlord and fixed the fair rent @ Rs.5/- per sq.ft. and directed the tenant to pay the amount of fair rent from the date of filing of the application. The tenant as well as landlord filed appeals under Clause 21 of the Rent Control Order, 1949 which are dismissed by the impugned order. ::: Uploaded on - 13/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 21:08:23 :::
Judgment 3 wp2756.08.odt
4. The learned advocate for the tenant has submitted that the landlord has not been able to establish the claim of Rs.5/- per sq.ft. and the evidence on record shows that the fair rent of the premises at the most could have been determined @ Rs.3/- per sq.ft. To support the submission, the learned advocate for the tenant has pointed out that Canara Bank which occupied 3800 sq.ft. on first floor of the building situated in the locality paid rent at the rate of Rs.3/- per sq.ft. It is pointed out that Life Insurance Corporation occupied 5500 sq.ft. in a building and paid rent @ Rs.14,000/- per month, the premises being situated in the same locality. Relying on the above instances and the evidence of another witness-Anilkumar Shankarlal Mulchandani who deposed that he occupied the premises admeasuring 500 sq.ft. in the same locality and paid rent @ Rs.500/- per month and maintenance charges @ Rs.1000/- per month, it is submitted that the conclusions of the subordinate authorities are unsustainable.
5. After examining the material and the documents placed on record of the petition and after going through the impugned orders, I find that after considering the documentary evidence placed on record, the House Rent Controller concluded that in the locality where the suit premises are situated, the rent for the ground floor premises varies between Rs.6/- per sq.ft to Rs.8.69 per sq.ft. and for the premises on second floor it was around Rs.3.30 per sq.ft. and on the basis of "law of average" the House Rent Controller determined the fair rent @ Rs.5/- per sq.ft. ::: Uploaded on - 13/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 21:08:23 :::
Judgment 4 wp2756.08.odt
6. The learned Additional Collector has independently examined the documentary evidence on record and has concurred with the conclusions of the House Rent Controller.
7. Though much is argued on behalf of the petitioner/ tenant that considering the rent which Canara Bank and Life Insurance Corporation of India were paying, the fair rent could not have been determined more than Rs.3/- per sq.ft., the other factors like condition of premises, other facilities available in the premises and the value as per the utility have not been brought on record by the tenant. The subordinate authorities have determined the fair rent applying the proper formula after considering the documentary evidence on the record. It cannot be said that the conclusions of the subordinate authorities suffer from any illegality or perversity. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned orders.
8. The petition is dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.
The amount deposited by the petitioner, if not withdrawn, shall be given to the respondents along with interest on it, if any.
JUDGE RRaut..
::: Uploaded on - 13/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 21:08:23 :::