High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mohammad Matten v. A.D.J./Special Judge, Jaunpur And Others - WRIT - A No. 70574 of 2005  RD-AH 18101 (26 October 2006)
Court no. 7
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 70574 of 2005
Mohd. Mateen versus Addl. District Judge/Special Judge
(E.C.) Act, Jaunpur and others.
Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari,J.
Notices were issued to respondent no.3 on 16.11.2005 but none has appeared on behalf of respondent no.3. By order dated 9.10.2006 notice on respondent no.3 was deemed to be sufficient.
The counsel for the petitioner has contended that respondent no.3 has his own two-pucca houses and the land also admeasuring 60sq.ft.x30 sq.ft. yet he is occupying the petitioner's shop measuring 20sq.ft.x13sq.ft.=260 sq.ft. in the city at Machchalishahar, district Jaunpur.
The petitioner is tenant in the disputed shop on monthly rent of Rs. 40/-.
The counsel for the petitioner-landlord submits that the rent of the disputed shop is too low in the present scenario. He prays that in the circumstances the rent of the aforesaid disputed shop may be increased suitably.
The rent of Rs.40/-per month in respect of the aforesaid disputed shop in question appears to be inadequate rent for the accommodation in dispute. A pragmatic approach has to be taken considering the location and rate of rent prevailing in the locality etc. With passage of time value of house rent has increased and as such it has to be proportionately increased in addition to notional increase of 10% in rent every 5 years as provided under Act No. XIII of 1972.
It is not the case of the tenant that no shop is available to him on rent per contra his case is that no accommodation is available on the rent, which he is paying at present to the landlord.
The writ Court can enhance the rent to a reasonable extent as has been held in Rajeshwari (Smt.) Vs. Smt. Prema Agarwal, 2005(1) ARC-526, Hari Mohan Kichlu Vs. VIIIth A.D.J. Muzaffarnagar and others, 2004 (2) ARC-652 and Khurshida Vs. A.D.J. 2004(2) ARC-64.
Taking a pragmatic approach, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and location/area of the accommodation/shop etc. it would be appropriate that the rent of the disputed shop now be increased to Rs. 3900/- per month (20 sq.ft.x 13 sq.ft.=260 sq.ft. at the rate of Rs.15/- per sq.ft., 260 sq.ft.x Rs.15/-= Rs.3900/- per month plus water tax and electricity charges etc.) from October, 2006 payable by 7th November, 2006.
It is accordingly directed that the tenant shall pay a sum of Rs. 3900/- per month towards rent to the landlord till further orders which shall be payable to the landlord thereafter by 7th day of each succeeding month. The rent fixed by this Court shall be increased 10% every 5 years till further orders according to the provisions of the Act.
In case of default in payment arrears of rent, if any and the current rent as directed by this Court the landlord can get the disputed shop vacated with the help of police within a period of one month by giving notice in writing.
List in the month of March, 2007. On that date, the counsel for the parties shall submit compliance report.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.