Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a tenant, challenged the fixation of standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The tenancy was created in 1961 at a monthly rent of Rs.20/-. The landlord initiated proceedings under Section 8 of the Act on 28/09/2000 for determination of standard rent. The trial court, after evidence, fixed the standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month from the date of filing. The tenant appealed under Section 34, which was dismissed. In the writ petition, the tenant argued that there was no evidence to support the fixation and that the interim rent of Rs.700/- per month was reasonable. The landlord raised a preliminary objection that the appeal under Section 34 was not maintainable against an order under Section 8. The High Court, however, did not decide the maintainability issue and dismissed the writ petition on merits, holding that the concurrent findings of fact were based on evidence and not perverse. The court noted that the tenant had accepted the standard rent by paying it and that subsequent suits for arrears had been decreed. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Standard Rent Determination - Section 8 Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Fixation of standard rent based on evidence - The trial court fixed standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month after considering the evidence led by parties. The appellate court confirmed the same. The High Court held that the concurrent findings of fact are not liable to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless perverse or based on no evidence. (Paras 2-6)
B) Rent Control - Appeal Maintainability - Section 34 Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Appeal against order under Section 8 - The respondent raised an objection that no appeal lies under Section 34 against an order under Section 8. However, the court did not decide this issue as the writ petition was dismissed on merits. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the standard rent fixed at Rs.1,200/- per month by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court was justified and whether the writ petition is maintainable.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the appellate court confirming the standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Standard rent determination
- Section 8 Maharashtra Rent Control Act
- 1999
- Section 34 appeal maintainability
- concurrent findings of fact
- writ jurisdiction scope
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (11) 39
Writ Petition No.2423 of 2009
Shri R.S. Parsodkar for Petitioner, Shri B.N. Mohta for Respondent
Mahabirprasad Chaurasia (Dead) through Legal Heir Rajkumar s/o Mahabirprasad Chaurasia
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the fixation of standard rent under Section 8 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (tenant) sought to quash the orders fixing standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month and sought reduction to Rs.700/- per month.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the fixation of standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.
Previous Decisions
The trial court fixed standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month from the date of filing of proceedings. The appellate court dismissed the appeal under Section 34 of the Act.
Issues
Whether the standard rent fixed at Rs.1,200/- per month is justified based on evidence.
Whether the appeal under Section 34 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 is maintainable against an order under Section 8.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner: There was no evidence to fix standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month; the construction was old (1950) and interim rent of Rs.700/- was reasonable.
Respondent: The petitioner had accepted the standard rent by paying it; subsequent suits for arrears were decreed; the appeal under Section 34 was not maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi
Concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and appellate court on standard rent fixation, based on evidence, are not liable to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless perverse or based on no evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the adjudication of standard rent in proceedings initiated under Section 8 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.
According to the respondent, as the rent was inadequate, he sought determination of standard rent and accordingly on 28/09/2000 initiated proceedings under Section 8 of the said Act.
Shri R.S. Parsodkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no evidence whatsoever on record to fix the standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month.
Shri B.N. Mohta, the learned Counsel for the respondent raised objection to the maintainability of the writ petition on a ground that the order passed by the trial court had been accepted by the petitioner and the subsequent suits filed by the landlord on the basis of standard rent being fixed at Rs.1,200/- per month had been decreed.
Procedural History
The landlord filed an application under Section 8 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 on 28/09/2000 for determination of standard rent. The trial court fixed standard rent at Rs.1,200/- per month. The tenant appealed under Section 34 of the Act, which was dismissed. The tenant then filed the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999: Section 8, Section 34
