High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
State Of U.P. Thru' Collector Etah And Others v. Smt. Omwati And Others - WRIT - A No. 17851 of 2006  RD-AH 7163 (3 April 2006)
Court No. 28.
CIVIL MISC.WRIT PETITON NO. 17851 of 2006
State of U.P. & ors.
Smt. Omwati and others.
Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.
Heard learned standing counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.N. Sinha representing the respondents.
The facts are that the premises in dispute having three rooms on the ground flour, four rooms on the first flour and verandah, garage toilet kitchen and bath room was let out by the respondents/ landlord to the petitioners on 23.3.1984 on a monthly rent of Rs. 1018/. Respondents/landlord filed an application under Section 21 (8) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 72 for enhancement of rent. The said application was contested by the petitioners by filing an objection. The petitioners filed a valuer report who stated that valuation of property is Rs. 5,08,000/ and accordingly its monthly rent would be Rs. 4233-33/. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer vide order dated 31.7.2000 allowed the application of respondent/landlord and enhanced the rent to Rs. 4,000/ per month w.e.f. 1.9.1995. Feeling aggrieved the petitioners went up in appeal which has been dismissed vide order dated 13.12.2005.
It has been urged by the learned Standing counsel since the first assessment of the premises in dispute was made on 1.4.1992 and hence Act No. XIII of 72 was not applicable. It has further been urged that the courts below erred in law on placing reliance upon the valuer report which did not contain any basis of the valuation of property.
In reply it has been contended that both the courts below have recorded a finding of fact that the premises in dispute was assessed for the first time in the year 1972 as such the provision of Act are fully applicable. It has also been urged that since the petitioners did not file any other surveyor report nor challenged the same as such it has been rightly accepted by the courts below.
I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the basis of assessment register produced before him which went to show that house was assessed for the first time on 1.8.1972 has rightly recorded a finding that the provision of U.P. Act No. XIII of 72 are fully applicable. He has further found that petitioners have not filed any surveyor report as such there was no reason to disbelieve the surveyor's report filed by the respondents/landlord. Besides, Tehsildar Etah has also submitted valuation report. The value of premises in dispute was Rs. 7 lakhs and he had recommended the rent of Rs. 4310/ per month. The finding recorded by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer has been confirmed by the appellate authority.
In view of the finding of fact recorded by two courts below there is no scope for interference in the impugned judgment. The enhancement of rent made by the Rent Control Eviction Officer and confirmed by the appellate authority is based on the material brought on record and no interference is called for. The writ petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.