Consideration of market value of the site and cost of building is a must.

R. Sengottuvelan, J.

1. C.R.P. NO. 2493 of 1978 is filed by the landlord against the order of the appellate authority in C.M.A. No. 308 of 1977 on the file of the Court of the appellate authority and the Principal Subordinate Judge of Madurai. Originally the landlord filed R.C. O.P. No. 415 of 1974 on the file of the Court of the Rent Controller and the District Munsif of Madurai for fixation of fair rent in respect of the premises bearing door No. 15-Aj 1, Westveli Street, Madurai, belonging to him. The case of the landlord before the Rent Controller is that the tenant who is described as Sulaiman, Proprietor of Naaz Dry Cleaners, took on lease the above said premises for non-residential purposes orally agreeing to pay a rent of Rs. 75, per month the tenancy month being the English Calendar month. It is also the case of the landlord that the building is situate in a very important locality and it is very near to the bus stand and the railway unction and the building is 18 years old. The building is in a very good condition with modern amenities. It is avererd in the rent control application that the building was built with brick and cement, plastered with cement and the windows, doors, door frames and shutters are all made of teak-wood and hence the building satisfies the requirement of class I building under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The building has got all modern amenities like internal water supply, sanitary and electrical installations. Having regard to the nature of the building, the Rent Controller ought to have allowed 30 per cent. of the cost of construction as per Section 4(5)(a). The depreciation can be allowed only at 0.5 per cent, per annum. It is also averred in the application that the cost of one square foot of the site in that vicinity is not less than Rs. 300. It is also the case of the landlord that calculating the said value of the site and also the cost of construction of the building as well as the allowances payable under the Act, the rent for the building in question at the rate of 12 per cent, of the gross return would come to not less than Rs. 600 per month. The tenant, Sulaiman, Proprietor, Naaz Dry Cleaners, in his counter-statement to the rent control application stated that he had advanced a sum of Rs. 10,000 to the landlord on 13th January, 1965 without interest and hence it was agreed that a sum of Rs. 75 was reasonable rent for the above said premises. The building is about a century old and is not in a good condition and is without any amenity. There is no window or door or any kind of amenity such as water facility, electric light etc. Only the premises measuring 9J x 16 was let out to the tenant and the tenant at his own cost put up three tube lights, a collapsible spring gate in the front, paved the front portion with cement stones and put up some wooden racks and other furniture. Above the portion let out to the tenant there is another construction which is let out to some other tenant. There is no sky glass for passage of light. The building could not be classified even as Class IV building, and as such no allowance can be made as per Section 4(5)(a). The landlord is also not entitled to anything towards the cost of the amenities. The rent of Rs. 75 itself is a fair rent in view of the fact that the tenant had advanced a sum of Rs. 10,000 to the landlord without any interest.

2. The learned Rent Controller after considering the evidence let in before him fixed the fair rent for the premises at Rs. 340 per month from the date of the application. As against the said order the tenant filed an appeal in C.M.A. No. 308 of 1977 on the file of the Court of the appellate authority and the Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai, and the learned appellate authority after going through the records and after hearing the arguments allowed the C.M.A. No. 308 of 1977 and fixed the fair rent for the above said premises at Rs. 194. Aggrieved by the above order this civil re