Date of coming into effect of fixed fair rent

PADMANABHAN, J:

1. The question that arises for consideration in this revision petition and which has been referred for decision by the Bench is when the building had been taken over by the Government under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 23 of 1973 (hereinafter called the Act), and when the Government became a tenant as provided for in the Act, whether the Government is liable to pay fair rent fixed under the Act subsequent to such tenancy from the date of the commencement of the tenancy or from the date of application for fixing the fair rent. The revision petition has been directed to be posted before a Bench by my Lord, the Chief Justice, in view of the Beach decision in George Qakes Ld v. Chief Judge, Small Cause Court, Madras 1950 2 M.L.J. 317=63 L.W. 860, and that of Ismail, J. in S. S. David by power of attorney agent M. Palaniappan v. State of Madras, rep. by the Dt. Collector, Coimbatore S.A. 1615 of 1969.

2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated as follows—The revision petitioner, the Accommodation Controller, Madras, requisitioned the ground floor of premises No. 3/1 Subbiah Naidu Street, Madras 7, belonging to the respondent under the Act. The rent was originally fixed at Rs. 150 per month. The tenancy commenced from 1965. The respondent then filed a petition before the Rent Controller (Court of Small Causes at Madras) H. R. C. No. 1458 of 1975, for fixation of fair rent for the premises under S. 4 of the Act. The petitioner therein prayed that the rent should be fixed at Rs. 492 per month, on the ground that the plinth area of the tenanted portion of the building which was constructed in the year 1955 was about 1000 sq. ft. and that the building is situate in a very busy locality, in the city. The revision petitioner, Accommodation Controller, resisted the claim for fixation of fair rent at 492 for per month. Along with the counter statement the revision petitioner filed a detailed report regarding the cost of constraction as prepared by the Public Works Department. On the basis of the said report, the revision petitioner contended that the fair rent of the premises would come to Rs. 304.

3. The learned Rent Controller, on a consideration of the documentary and oral evidence in the case, fixed the fair rent at Rs. 245 per month, by the order, dated 4th May, 1971. He directed that the revision petitioner should pay the fair rent of Rs. 245 from the date of presentation of the petition. The respondent landlord filed H.R.A 302 of 1977 before the Appellate Authority under the Act (the Court of Small Causes, Madras). The Appellate Authority set aside the order of the Rent Controller, and allowed the appeal. The Appellate Authority fixed the fair rent at Rs. 304. The Appellate Authority further held that the fair rent fixed would become effective from the date of commencement of the original tenancy itself subject to the law of limitation.

4. The Appellate Authority followed the decision of Ismail, J. (as he then was) in S. A. 1615 of 1969. Aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Authority, the Accommodation Controller has filed this revision petition.

5. The revision petition was in the first instance heared by the learned Chief Justice. The learned Chief Justice on being referred to the Bench decision in George Oakes Ld v. Chief Judge Small Causes Court, Madras 1950 2 M.L.J. 317: 63 L.W. 860 and that of Ismail, J. in S. A. 1615 of 1969, felt that the principle laid down in the aforesaid Bench decision appeared to the preferable even though the Bench decision was rendered with reference to the Act of 1946 and in relation to voluntary tenancies.

6. Mr. Suryaprakasam, learned Government Advocate, urged two contentions—

1) The order of Appellate Authority fixing the fair rent at Rs. 304 is erroneous. The learned Government Advocate pleaded that the Appellate Authority should have accepted the fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller.

(2) The order of A