- (1.) HEARD Sri M.K.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ravi Kiran Jain,learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Narendra Kumar Giri, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 5. This writ petition is directed against order dated 26.10.2012 passed by R.C. And E.O./A.D.M. Civil Supply Agra in old case no.72 of 1985 Rajendra Singh and others Vs. Roman Catholic Diocess of Agra Limited issuing recovery certificate in form G under Rule 24(2) of the Rules framed under U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act 1972 for recovery of Rs.8,12,000/- as arrears of enhanced rent from l7.3.1986 to 6.3.2011 after adjusting Rs.5,80,000/- earlier deposited pursuant to an order passed by this court challenging the basic order of enhancement of rent which had been passed under Section 29-A(5) of U.P. Act no.13 of 1972. The impugned order was passed on the application of the landlord respondents filed on 13.6.2011.
(2.) RESPONDENTS no. 1 to 5 claiming to be the landlords of the property in dispute and further claiming that petitioner was its tenant filed application under Section 29-A(5) of U.P. Act no.13 of 1972. Section 29-A (2) and (5) are quoted below: ("2). This section applies only to land let out, either before or after the commencement of this section, where the tenant, with the landlord's consent has erected any permanent structure and incurred expenses in execution thereof. (5). The District Magistrate shall on the application of the landlord or the tenant determine the annual rent payable in respect of such land at the rate of ten per cent per annum of the prevailing market value of the land, and such rent shall be payable, except as provided in sub-section (6) from the date of expiration of the term for which the land was let or from the commencement of this section, whichever is later." The initial order was passed by the R.C. And E.O. On 7.3.1986 determining the rent of the property in dispute @ of 58,000/- per year. Against the said order petitioner filed writ petition no.10867 of 1986. In the said writ petition stay order was passed on 8.7.1986 staying the operation challenged therein on the condition that tenant continued to deposit rent @ of Rs.12000/- per year. The said stay order was modified on 15.9.1987 and instead of Rs.12000/- per year, tenant petitioner was directed to deposit Rs.29,000/- per year. The writ petition was allowed on 3.12.2007. Till then under interim order petitioner had deposited Rs.5,80,000/-. Against the order passed by the High Court allowing the writ petition S.L.P. was filed in the Supreme Court which was converted into Civil appeal no.539 of 2009. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal on 5.11.2009, set aside the judgment of the High Court and restored the judgment and order of R.C. and E.O. dated 7.3.1986. In the penultimate paragraph of the said judgment of the Supreme Court it was observed as follows: "We make it clear that since proceedings under Section 29-A(5) of the Act are summary proceedings, this will not prevent respondent no.1 from getting its rights adjudicated in a civil suit in accordance with law, if so advised. If such a suit is filed, the court concerned shall decide the same on its own merits expeditiously in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made by us in this order or by the High Court or by the Rent Controller."
(3.) R .C. and E.O. in his impugned order dated 26.10.2012 held that it had jurisdiction to issue the certificate and from 7.3.1986 till 6.3.2011 an amount of Rs.14,50,000/- was payable out of which Rs.5,80,000/- had already been deposited and withdrawn by the landlord hence recovery certificate for Rs.8,70,000/- was issued. Rule 24 of the Rules framed under the Act is quoted below: "24. Certificate of recovery (Section 34 (1) (1) Where in any proceedings under theAct, any sum on account of costs or otherwise is awarded to any party by the District Magistrate, the Prescribed Authority or the Appellate or Revising Authority, such party may apply to the authority concerned to proceed under rule. (2) Upon the receipt of an application under sub-rule (1), the District Magistrate, the Prescribed Authority or the Appellate or Revising authority, as the case may be, shall prepare and issue a certificate of recovery in Form G. (3) An application for the execution of the certificate of recovery may then be presented to the court of Small Causes Courts Act, 1887. After the execution application is disposed of, the executing Court shall certify the result to the authority issuing the certificate of recovery." ;