The appellate court has the discretion under Section 6(5) of the Act to determine the effective date for the standard rent, and its decision in this regard will not be considered illegal or irregular if it exercises its jurisdiction properly.

1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned advocate for the non-petitioner who has entered caveat.In suit under Section 6 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short, 'the Act' hereafter) the learned said trial Court fixed the standard rent as Rs. 120/- per month and increased the rent from Rs. 80/- to Rs. 120/- per month. The learned trial Court did not mention that the rent is fixed from the date of the application. The lower appellate Court placing reliance on Miran v. Birbalram, in which it has been observed that even if there is no provision in the Act as to from which date the standard rent may be fixed, obviously and generally it is to be fixed from the date of the application, ordered that the standard rent shall be payable form the date of the suit. Even otherwise, under Section 6(5) of the Act, a discretion is vested in Court to appoint a date from which the standard rent determined by it under Section 6 of the Act shall be deemed to have effect. The appellate Curt has all the powers of the trial Court and, therefore, in exercising discretion under Section 6(5) of the Act in ordering that the standard rent is payable from the date of suit, has not acted illegally or irregularly in exercise of its jurisdiction.No costs for interference is made out. The revision petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.