Biren Vaishnav, J.

Both these proceedings arise out of a common judgment and decree dated 30.06.2006. By the aforesaid judgment, the learned Presiding Officer, 4th Fast Track Court, Morbi dismissed the petitioner - applicant's Regular Civil Appeal No. 12 of 1997 which challenged the dismissal of Regular Civil Suit No. 43 of 1987 vide judgment and decree dated 05.08.1995. The petitioner - landlord also failed in his challenge in proceedings of standard rent filed by the tenant. The Misc. Application No. 60 of 1987 for fixation of standard rent filed by the tenant was allowed by the judgment and order of 05.08.1995 and the landlord's Civil Revision Application No. 2 of 1995 was dismissed.

1.1 In other words, Special Civil Application is at instance of the landlord - original defendant challenging the order dated 30.06.2006 in Civil Revision Application No. 2 of 1995 by which the respondent herein - original plaintiff's application for fixing standard rent at Rs. 40/- per month was allowed. Civil Revision Application No. 53 of 2007 is also filed by the same landlord who lost in both the courts when the Regular Civil Appeal No. 22 of 1997 filed by him against the decree of the Civil Court in favour of the plaintiff tenant was dismissed. The revision applicant will also be hereinafter be referred to as 'the petitioner'.

2. The background of the facts in which these proceedings arise are as under:

2.1 The petitioner - a landlord owned a shop at Khara Kuva at Morbi. The suit shop was let out to the respondent on 26.07.1984. Initially, the respondent filed Civil Misc. Application No. 77 of 1984 before the Morbi Civil Court on 26.07.1984. It was the case of the respondent tenant that the rent of Rs. 300/- fixed for the suit shop was excessive and therefore standard rent of the shop be fixed. It appears that on the respondent - tenant filing such an application, an agreement was executed on the same day i.e. on 26.07.1984 between the tenant and the landlord, by which, the parties agreed to the rent being fixed at Rs. 300/-. Consent terms were drawn accordingly and by an order dated 26.07.1984 i.e. on the same day, the application was disposed of on the basis of such consent terms and the standard rent was fixed at Rs. 300/-.

2.2 The landlord thereafter served a notice Ex. 32 to the defendant on 30.06.1987 that the defendant was a tenant in arrears of rent from 24.12.1986 to 23.06.1987. The respondent - tenant on 07.03.1987 filed Regular Civil Suit No. 43 of 1987 before the Civil Court, Morbi praying that the order dated 26.07.1984 of fixation of standard rent at Rs. 300/- was obtained by the landlord by fraud. The plaint alleged that in fact no consent was given by the plaintiff - tenant - respondent herein for arriving at a consent of standard rent of Rs. 300/-. That the actual standard rent of Rs. 40/- came to their knowledge recently and by subterfuge and misleading the tenant into believing that the standard rent was Rs. 300/-, consent was obtained by the landlord by fraud and on the day the application of standard rent was filed, agreement was signed on same day and decree was drawn on same day for standard rent. The tenant therefore prayed that the order of fixing standard rent of Rs. 300/- on 26.07.1984 be set aside as being one obtained by fraud. The tenant also filed Misc. Application No. 60 of 1987 on 24.07.1987 praying that the standard rent of the demised premises be fixed at Rs. 40/-.

2.3 Both the civil suit and the standard rent application were consolidated and heard by the learned Civil Judge (S.D), Morbi, as there was no separate rent court and by a judgment and decree dated 05.08.1995, the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) decreed the suit of the tenant - respondent herein declaring that the order dated 26.07.1984 in Misc. Application No. 77 of 1984 fixing standard rent at Rs. 300/- was obtained by fraud and therefore was set aside. By an order of same date, Misc. Application for fixation of rent at Rs. 40/- filed