The standard rent can be increased by 10% every three years under Section 6A of the Delhi Rent Control Act. However, where the standard rent has been fixed under Section 6(1)(A)(2)(b), Section 6A is not applicable. The rateable value can be assessed on the basis of the cost of construction and cost of land after the expiry of five years from the date of letting out.

( 1 ) THE petition is directed against the order dated 1st November, 1996 passed by respondent No. 3 in House Tax Appeal and order dated 21st December, 1993 assessing the rateable value at Rs. 9,900. 00 with effect from 1st December, 1998 in respect of property No. B-2/250, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi.

( 2 ). The petitioner owns the property No. 2/250 Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. The rateable value of the said property was fixed at Rs. 8,130. 00 w. e. f. 1. 4. 1983 aftertaking into consideration the costs of land and costs of construction, following the procedure under Section 6 of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

( 3 ). In 1991 respondent Nos. 1 and 2 proposed to increase the rateable value of the said property from Rs. 8,130. 00 to Rs. 10. 170. 00 w. e. f. 29. 3. 1991 and from Rs. 8,130. 00 to Rs. 36. 500. 00 from 1. 4. 1989 on the ground of amendment of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The petitioner filed objections against the proposed increase in the rateable value. By order dated 21st December, 1993 respondent No. 2 assessed the rateable value at Rs. 9,900. 00 with effect from 1. 12. 1988. The costs of land and costs of construction was taken at Rs. l,09,500. 00 on which the annual rateable value, as per the amended Delhi Rent Control Act, was fixed.

( 4 ). Aggrieved by the order of respondent No. 2 the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 169 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. The appeal was dismissed and the order of respondent No. 2 was maintained.

( 5 ). The petitioner contends that the standard rent once having been fixed under Section 6a of the Delhi Rent Control Act, respondent No. 1 was empowered to increase the rateable value only by 10% in view of Section 6a, and could not have assessed the property on the basis of cost of construction and cost of land. The premises were let out in July, 1978 and there was no change in the letting value and, therefore, there was no ground for raising the rateable value. In short the contention was that 10% increase was to be made on the standard rent and not on the costs of construction and cost of land. He further contended that the order passed is not a reasoned one and is in violation of principles of natural justice.

( 6 ). The petitioner placed reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in Dr. Balbir Singh and Ors. v. M. C. D. and Ors. , AIR 1985 SC 339; Bhagwat Rai and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. , AIR 1996 SC 95; and Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. M/s. Express Newspapers Ltd. , AIR 1998,sc 2945=74 (1998) DLT 190 (SC ).

( 7 ). It has been held by the Supreme Court in Dr. Balbir Singh s case that the standard rent after the expiration of a period of five years would be determinable on the principles set out in Sub-section (l) (A) (2) (b) of Section 6 and the rateable value of the premises, whether residential or non residential, cannot exceed the standard rent but in a given case may be less than the standard rent. The premises in the present case are partly tenanted and partly self-occupied. After the expiry of the period of five years the standard rent was determinable on the principles set out in Section 6 (l) (A) (2) (b ). The property was let out from the very beginning and the assessment of rateable value could be made in accordance with the rent realised for the first five years. After five years the property was to be assessed on the basis of costs of construction and cost of land in terms of Dr. Balbir Singh s case.

( 8 ). Sections 6a and 6 (l) (A) (2) (b) were inserted in the Delhi Rent Control Act by Amendment Act, 1988. Section 6a reads as under:

"6a. Revision of rent. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act the standard rent, or where no standard rent is fixed under the provisions of this Act in respect of any premises, the rent agreed upon between the landlord and the tenant, may be increased by ten per cent every three years. "the provisions of Section6 A of the Act are not applicable. The rateable value has not been