( 1 ) THE present revision application is filed by the original plaintiffs against Union of India through the Post Master, General Post Office, Mirzapur road, Ahmedabad, for the recovery of Rs. 1,870. 50 being the amount of education cess plus the interest of Rs. 290. 50 at the rate of 9% per annum. The aforesaid amount was claimed by the plaintiffs as the opponent Union of India showed its unwillingness and disowned its liability to pay full amount of education cess for the financial year April 1973 to March 1974 which comes to Rs. 1870. 50.

( 2 ) FOR the recovery of the said amount, the Regular Civil Suit No. 2834 of 1975 was filed in the Small Cause Court at Ahmedabad on July 31, 1975.

( 3 ) THE Union of India resisted the suit by its Writtent Statement at Exh. 11 and inter alia contended that though it has agreed by Exh. 27, registered Rent note dated 2-10-1968, to pay all Municipal taxes and other taxes, it is under no obligation to pay more than an amount equal to half the amount of education cess levied on the demised premises. It further contended that in view of the amendment in Sec. 19 of the Gujarat Education Cess Act, 1962, which came into force from April 1, 1970, it was not liable to pay more than half the amount of Education Cess. However, the trial Court has passed the decree for the full amount as claimed by the plaintiffs.

( 4 ) HENCE, the New Trial Application No. 29 of 1978 under Sec. 38 of presidency Small Cause Courts Act was filed, which was subsequently converted into Appeal under the Rent Act. The appellate Bench heard the said matter and partly allowed the appeal inter alia modifying the decree that the defendant Union of India do pay to the plaintiffs an amount of Rs. 935. 25 only which would be half the amount of Education Cess for the period from 1-4-1973 to 31-3-1974 in respect of the demised premises within a period of two months from 1-5-1979, the date on which the order was passed. The parties were ordered to bear their own costs of the suit as well as of the appeal.

( 5 ) BEING aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment passed by the Bench of the small Cause Court dated 1-5-1979, the present revision application has been filed, under Sec. 29 (2) of the Bombay Rent Act.

( 6 ) THOUGH the powers of this Court under Bombay Rent Act are wider than revision under Sec. 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, this Court has a very limited powers under Sec. 29 (2) of the Bombay Rent Court, namely, it has jurisdictional control over the subordinate Court and further that the powers are to be exercised with a view to satisfy that the judgment rendered by the lower Court is according to law and unless miscarriage of justice is done, this Court would not like to interfere with the order passed by the Court below.

( 7 ) WITH this background, it is necessary to see what was the relevant provision of law under the Education Cess Act prevalent for recovering the Education Cess claimed for the period from 1-4-1973 to 21-3-1974. On perusal of the provisions of the Act it is clear that under Sec. 12 of the said Act leviability of Education cess is created on lands and buildings with effect from 1st April 1970 under Sec. 12 of the said Act. Under Sec. 14 of the said Act the primary liability is held to be with the occupier of the building who is the owner thereof or who is holding it on a building or other lease granted by or on behalf of Government or a local authority or on a building lease from any person, then the tax shall be leviable primarily on such occupier. In any other case, it will be the liability of clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 14 of the said Act. Here in this case, the liability would be on the lessor, that is, the landlord. Sec. 19 of the said Act confers a right on the landlord who pays the tax when it is not occupied by him but the occupation thereof during such period from the person in actual occupation of such building. However, that Section has undergone certain amendmen