Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1987 DIGILAW 256 (PAT)

Md. Enam Jalil v. The State of Bihar

1987-08-14

N.P.SINGH, S.N.JHA

body1987
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ application was filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing an interim ORDER :passed by the Commissioner, Patna Division, while entertaining a revision application against ORDER :s of the Collector and the House Controller, Patna. 2. It appears that the petitioner had filed an application before the House Controller for fixation of the fair rent of the building in question. Then the building was in possession of M/s Bihar Water Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). The House Controller fixed the rent of the building in question at the rate of Rs. 10,560/- per month. Being aggrieved by that ORDER :, the Corporation filed an appeal before the Collector, Patna in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Collector, Patna, while admitting the appeal, passed an ORDER :directing the Corporation to deposit the arrears of rent in accordance with section 16 of the Act. The Corporation thereafter filed a revision application before the Commissioner, who admitted the said application and stayed the direction of the Collector, Patna, in respect of the deposit of rent during the pendency of the appeal. Against that ORDER :, the present writ application was filed saying that in view of section 16 (1) of the Act, the Commissioner had no power to stay the direction of the Collector, Patna, directing the Corporation to deposit the arrears as well as current rent at the rate fixed by the House Controller. 3. This Court on 4.6.87 passed an ORDER :directing the Commissioner, Patna Division to dispose of the said revision application and to reconsider the ORDER :of stay passed by her in the light of section 16 (1) of the Act. 4. Today at the stage of admission itself the Corporation has entered appearance. 5. We are informed by the counsel for the parties that the Commissioner, Patna Division bas disposed of the revision application and remanded the case to the Collector for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Section 16 of the Act is as follows : – "16. 4. Today at the stage of admission itself the Corporation has entered appearance. 5. We are informed by the counsel for the parties that the Commissioner, Patna Division bas disposed of the revision application and remanded the case to the Collector for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Section 16 of the Act is as follows : – "16. Deposit of rent determined by the Controller during the pendency of appeal or revision–(1) Where the fair rent of any building has been determined by the Controller under provisions of this Act and the tenant prefers an appeal to the a appellate authority against the ORDER :of the Controller or makes an application for revision to the Commissioner against the ORDER :of the appellate authority, as the case may be, it shall be required of the tenant to pay the rent at the rate fixed by the Controller month to month by the fifteenth day of the following month, together with arrears, if any, and he may deposit such rent in the prescribed manner stating the circumstances in which such deposit is made until the dispute regarding the fair rent has been settled between the parties. (2) The appellate authority or the Commissioner may, after giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard, make an ORDER :for deposit of rent at such rate as may be determined, month by month and arrears of rent if any, and in case of non-compliance of this ORDER :, the appellate authority or the Commissioner shall ORDER :the defence against the fair rent ORDER :to be struck off. The landlord may apply for permission to withdraw the amount of rent so deposited without prejudice to any other legal remedy to which he is otherwise entitled and the court may permit him to do so." On a plain reading, section 16 (1) requires the tenant to pay the rent at the rate fixed by the Controller month to month by the fifteenth day of the following month, together with arrears, if any, and such rent including the arrears may be deposited in the prescribed manner stating the circumstances in which such deposit was being made until the dispute regarding the fair rent is finally settled. Sub-section (2) of section 16 of the Act vests power in the appellate authority or the Commissioner, after hearing the parties concerned, to pass an ORDER :in respect of deposit of rent at such rate as may be determined and it also provides the consequence for non-compliance of such ORDER :. Sub-section (2) of section 16 applies when the appellate authority or the Commissioner as revisional authority finally disposes of the appeal or revision, as the case may be, against the ORDER :passed by the Controller fixing the fair rent of the building in question. But, in view of section 16 (1) of the Act, during the pendency of the appeal or revision, the rent fixed by the Controller has to be paid or deposited in the prescribed manner. As such the Commissioner could not have stayed the operation of the ORDER :of the Controller, during the pendency of the revision application. Similarly, during the pendency of the appeal even the Collector cannot stay the payment or deposit of the rent month to month including the arrears. 6. In the instant case, the House Controller has fixed the rent of the building in question at the rate of Rs. 10,560/- per month. That ORDER :is under consideration in the appeal which is pending before the Collector, Patna, who is the appellate authority. In our opinion, he rightly directed during the pendency of the appeal the Corporation to deposit month to month rent and the arrears at the rate as fixed by the Controller. In such a situation, there does not appear to be any justification in not implementing the earlier direction issued by the Collector in respect of deposit of rent during the pendency of the appeal. 7. Accordingly, we direct the Corporation to deposit the arrears of rent as well as rent month to month at the rate fixed by the Controller by the ORDER :which is under appeal after adjusting the amount which might have been deposited by the Corporation, on or before 15th of October, 1987. Out of the amount so deposited it will be open to the petitioner to withdraw 50 percent of the total deposit including the amount which has already been deposited earlier by the Corporation. We, however, direct the learned Collector, Patna to dispose of the appeal which has been filed on behalf of the petitioner on or before 30th November, 1987. 8. We, however, direct the learned Collector, Patna to dispose of the appeal which has been filed on behalf of the petitioner on or before 30th November, 1987. 8. This writ application is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above. Application allowed.