Smt. Meera Kori vs Mohd. Faheem Siddqui

Shantanu Kemkar, J.

By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.8.2006 passed by the Civil Judge, Class-II, Itarsi District Hoshangabad in Civil Suit No. 2-A/2005.

The Respondent/Plaintiff filed a suit for eviction against the Petitioner/ Defendant on the grounds enumerated u/s 12(1)(a) and (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short ''Act''). According to the Plaintiff, the suit premises was rented out to the Petitioner Defendant for Rs. 500/- per month.

In the said suit the Petitioner/Defendant filed an application u/s 13(2) of the Act and raised a dispute about the arrears and rate of rent. Similar dispute was also raised in the written statement. It is stated by the Petitioner/Defendant that the suit premises was let out to her by the Plaintiff for Rs. 200/- per month and she had already paid the rent upto July, 2004 and there is no arrears of rent as claimed by the Respondent Plaintiff from January, 2002.

The trial Court by impugned order dated 17-8-2006 decided the Defendant''s application filed u/s 13(2) of the Act and fixed the provisional rent as Rs. 400/- per month by taking into consideration the locality of the suit premises, the prevailing rent and the financial status of the parties. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner Defendant has filed this petition.

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, in my view, the impugned order passed by the trial Court cannot be sustained. The fixation of reasonable provisional rent without summary enquiry by taking into the extraneous considerations like financial status of the parties, locality of the suit premises and the prevailing rent cannot be sustained. In order to fix the reasonable provisional rent in the absence of any documentary evidence the trial Court ought to have directed the parties to file affidavits to that effect. It is now well settled that the reasonable provisional rent can be fix on the basis of rent receipts, rent shown in the property tax register or in the absence of any documentary evidence only the basis of affidavits. See Bhagwan Das v. Smt. Savitri Bai [1977 (1) MPWN 328] & Ramnath Mahore v. Rakesh Kumar Gangil [1986 MPLJ 471]. The trial Court without resorting to the aforesaid summary enquiry has taken into consideration irrelevant and extraneous considerations and has fixed the provisional rent.

In this view of the matter the order of fixation of provisional rent without holding any summary enquiry is liable to be and is hereby quashed. The trial Court is directed to give opportunity to the parties to file affidavits in support of their respective contentions about the rate of rent and fix the reasonable provisional rent.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of the trial Court is set aside. No orders as to costs.

C.C. within seven days.