- (1.) THIS is an application in revision against the order of the Munsif, Lucknow fixing Rs. 19/-p. m. as the fair rent of the premises belonging to the applicant.
(2.) IT appears that the defendant owned a house in Aminabad and it was let out to the plaintiff. The plaintiff paid Rs. 1500/- to the defendant and the defendant informed the plaintiff that this rent had been received by him for one year. Subsequently the plaintiff sent a notice to the defendant asking him as to what the rent of the premises was and what was the period towards which the amount sent was appropriated. No reply was sent to this notice. He then instituted a suit under the Control of Rent and Eviction Act for the fixation of fair rent. The lower Court found that there was no agreed rent and that Rs. 19/- was the fair rent and decreed the claim. A plea of jurisdiction had also been raised by the defendant in the lower Court and it was contended that inasmuch as the agreed rent was in excess of Rs. 500/- the Munsif had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The learned Munsif, however, framed no issue on the point and has given no finding as to whether he had or had not jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The defendant has now come up in revision.
(3.) THIS application in revision originally came up for hearing before a Single Judge of this Court and the first point which was urged on behalf of the applicant before him was that the suit should have been instituted in the Court of the Civil Judge inasmuch as the agreed rent of the premises was Rs. 1500/- per year. The learned Judge doubted the correctness of the decision of another single Judge of this Court reported in -- 'prayag Narain v. Dr. Mangha Ram', AIR 1951 All 562 (A ). He, therefore, referred the case to a Division Bench.;