AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Duraiswamy, J.—The above civil revision petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order passed in RCA No. 62 of 2000 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Principal Sub Court, Trichirappalli, confirming the fair and decretal order passed in RCOP No. 252 of 1997 on the file of Rent Controller, II Additional District Munsif Court, Trichirappalli.
The tenant is the revision petitioner and the landlord is the respondent. The landlord filed RCOP No. 252 of 1997 for fixation of fair rent. The tenant came into possession of the property on 17.07.1987 on a monthly rent of Rs. 12,500/-. The rent was enhanced to Rs. 15,000/- on 01.08.1992 for a period of 5 years. The extent of the property leased to the tenant was 8800 square feet i.e. 4400 square feet on the ground floor and 4400 square feet on the first floor. Doors and windows are all made up of teak wood. The premises has electric fittings and fixtures. There is a compound wall with an overhead water tank. The landlord also provided ceiling fans in the ground floor and 26 tube lights and other lights. The premises is situated in the heart of the city namely Thillai Nagar, which is situated in and around Commercial shops, schools, hospitals etc., The age of the building was 20 years at the time of filing of RCOP. In these circumstances, the landlord filed RCOP for fixation of fair rent. In the counter filed by the tenant, the tenant has disputed the averments stated in the petition filed by the landlord.
Before the Rent Controller on the side of the landlord 8 documents were marked and 2 witnesses were examined and on the side of the tenant there was no documentary evidence. However, two witnesses namely RW1 and RW2 were examined. The Commissioner''s report and plans were marked as Ex.C1 to Ex.C3. The Rent Controller took into consideration the oral and documentary evidences and relied upon Ex.A8/the valuation report given by PW2 and relied upon the guideline value at Rs. 448.70 per square feet, fixed the value at Rs. 37,69,080/-. For relying upon the guideline value of the land, the Court below also has given a finding that the market value is much more than the guideline value in the said locality and since the landlord agreed to fix the value of the land based on the guideline value, the Rent Controller took into consideration the guideline value of the land and fixed the value after deducting depreciation. The Rent Controller fixed the cost of the building at Rs. 23,98,505/- and a sum of Rs. 2,35,850 towards amenities provided. The Rent Controller valued the premises at Rs. 64,03,438 and since the premises was let out for the commercial purposes 12% of the total value was fixed as yearly rent and the monthly rent comes to Rs. 62,625/-. The monthly rent fixed by the Rent Controller are based on the evidence produced by the parties.
That apart, the rent controller has fixed the monthly rent based on the guideline value in respect of the property. Though the value could be fixed on market value, the Rent Controller has taken the guideline value for calculating the value of the land and fixed the rent at Rs. 62,625/- per month. With regard to the construction of the building, the Rent Controller has fixed the value at Rs. 32,138,13.70P. Taking into consideration the age of the building, which according to the witness was 21 years, the rent Controller could have fixed a lesser amount. Therefore, I am of the view the fixation of the value of the building at Rs. 32,138,13.70P is on the higher side. Apart from this, in other aspects, the Rent Controller has fixed the correct value. Therefore, taking into consideration the value of the land and also the value of the building, I am of the view the fair rent fixed by the Court below at Rs. 62,625/- per month is on the higher side and I am of the view that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) per month can be fixed as monthly rent for the demised premised. The Rent Controller Appellate Authority also confirmed the fixation of fair rent by the Rent Controller. I am of the considered view that taking into consideration the value of the land and building and also the amenities provided by the landlord, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) per month is fixed as rent for the premises.
In these circumstances, the fair and final order passed by the Courts below are modified as below;-
The revision petitioner/tenant is hereby directed to pay the respondent/landlord a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as rent per month from the date of petition i.e. 23.09.1997 till 30.04.2002 towards fair rent instead of Rs. 62,625/- per month as fixed by the Courts below.
It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner/ tenant had deposited a sum of Rs. 26,19,375/- towards difference of rent payable by them calculating the rent at the rate of Rs. 62,625/- per month for 55 months commencing from 23.09.1997 to 30.04.2002. Since this Court had reduced the fair rent from Rs. 62,625/- to Rs. 50,000/- per month, the respondent/landlord is entitled to withdraw the amount calculating the monthly rent at Rs. 50,000/- per month for the said period. The petitioner/tenant is also permitted to withdraw the balance amount, since the petitioner/tenant has deposited the rent at the rate of Rs. 62,625/-, which has been reduced by this Court at Rs. 50,000/- per month. It is needless to state that if the amount has been deposited in a fixed deposit, the parties are at liberty to withdraw the amount together with proportionate accrued interest. The civil revision petition is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.