Kasturi Devi vs Gurdev Raj Sethi
1995 Latest Caselaw 938 Del

JUDGMENT

Arun Kumar, J.

(1) This second appeal is directed against the judgment of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 9th April, 1979 fixing the standard rent of the premises in suit which is a shop at Rs. 30.00 per month. The agreed rent of the premises was Rs. 65.00 per month. The respondent tenant applied for fixing of standard rent. The Additional Controller fixed the standard rent at Rs. 12.50 per month with effect from 1st April. 1971. The land-lady challenged the said order of the Additional Controller before the Rent Control Tribunal. The Tribunal partly accepted the appeal and fixed the standard rent at Rs. 30.00 per month. The present petition by the land-lady is directed against the said judgment of the Tribunal.

(2) According to the learned Counsel for the appellant in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the agreed rent should be the standard rent. In support of his submission, he has invited my attention to the finding of the Tribunal that standard rent of the premises in suit cannot be fixed on the principles mentioned in Section 6 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). If the standard rent cannot be fixed under Section 6 of the Act, the Controller can resort to Section 9 of the Act for purposes of fixing the standard rent. In the present case, the Tribunal has observed that "it is true that under Section 9(4), the standard rent of similar premises can be taken into consideration but where the standard rent of similar premises is not fixed, in any Court proceedings, I am of the view that rent which is charged by the landlord himself when he let out the premises after constructing the same should furnish us some criteria for fixing the standard rent of the said premises. The tenant has deposed that one shop of cycle repair stands let out at the rental of Rs. 40.00 per month but he has not examined the tenant or the landlord of the shop. So keeping in view the rent of the shop in question and the rent of the three shops of the year 1961 and keeping other circumstances like the fact that the shops are located in a Bazar now, the standard rent of the shop in question should be Rs. 30.00 per month. Accordingly, the rent fixed is Rs. 30.00 per month w.e.f. 12th April, 1979 as the standard rent of the premises."

(3) The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the present case in view,of the finding of the Tribunal that the standard rent could not be fixed under Section 6 of the Act for lack of proper evidence and the further finding that under Section 9(4) of the Act, the standard rent of similar premises can be taken into account but in the present case, there was no evidence of standard rent of similar premises having been fixed by any Court proceeding, the petition for standard rent should have been dismissed. As per this argument, the standard rent petition should have been dismissed by the authorities under the Rent Control Act because it was not possible to fix the standard rent under Section 6 of the Act nor was there evidence of standard rent of similar premises under Section 9(4) of the Act. My attention has been invited to the provisions of Section 9(4) of Act which run as under:

(4) Where for any reason it is not possible to determine the standard rent of any premises on the principles set forth under Section 6, the Controller may fix such rent as would be reasonable having regard to the situation, locality and condition of the premises and the amenities provided therein, and where there are similar or nearly similar premises in the locality, having regard also to the standard rent payable in respect of such premises."

(5) A reference to the above provision shows that standard rent of similar or nearly similar premises in the locality is not the only criteria mentioned therein. The Controller can also take into consideration rent as would be reasonable having regard to the situation, locality and condition of the premises and the amenities provided therein. In the present case, the Tribunal has while fixing the standard rent of the premises taken into consideration the situation, locality and condition of the premises. The Tribunal in this connection has taken into consideration oral evidence and on that basis has come to a conclusion that Rs. 30/ - would be a reasonable rent. I am unable to agree with the learned Counsel for the appellant that the only basis for fixing of the standard rent under Sub-section (4) of Section 9 the Act can be rent of similar or nearly similar premises in the locality. When rent of nearly similar premises is not available, the Controller can still take into consideration the other factors mentioned in Sub-section (4) of Section 9 of the Act and arrive at a conclusion about reasonable rent of the premises. This is what has happened in the present case. In this second appeal under Section 39 of the Act as it then stood, I am not inclined to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal in this behalf. The appeal is dismissed. No costs. C.M. 2247/1979: These are cross-objections filed on behalf of the tenant praying that the standard rent of the premises be fixed at Rs. 12.50 per month as determined by the Additional Controller in the present case. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent.

(6) Dismissed.