Honble PRASAD, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2). The suit was instituted by plaintiff for ejectment, mense profits and fixing of standard rent. The appellant has challenged the fixation of provisional rent, which is claimed to be on the higher side. According to the learned counsel, in 1970 the premises was let out at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month. The learned counsel submits that the premises which was let out for Rs. 125/- in 1970 its rent has been enhanced to Rs. 2,000/-. According to the learned counsel, this increase is disproportionate. The learned counsel has further submitted that increase of Rs.2000/- is only for the period starting from January, 2004. Prior to this the rent has been enhanced from Rs. 125/- to Rs. 300/-. That too again is in the higher side. The rent has been fixed in many multiplies of the original rent. Provisional rent is to be fixed in terms of Section 7 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act).

(3). It has been urged that while deciding the question of fixation of provisional rent the trial court has taken into consideration such parameters which could not have been looked into

Click Here to Read the rest of this document