Gopi Nath, J. - (1.) These two second appeals arise out of proceedings under Section 6 of the U.P. (Temporary) Accommodation Requisition Act (No. XXV of 1947) hereinafter called as the Act. The claimants who are the owners are the appellants. Bungalow No. 16/14, Civil Lines, Kanpur, was requisitioned by the District Magistrate, under Section 3 of the Act. Four persons, viz. Jagannath Bagla, his wife Smt. Ratni Devi Bagla, his son Sri Ashok Kumar Bagla and Sri Mohan Lal Bagla had purchased this property in an auction sale on 17-2-1952. The property had been a tenanted accommodation throughout. It fetched a rent of Rs. 100/- per month during the period 1938-43. During 1943-48 its rent was Rs. 190/- p.m. From 1948-53 a rent of Rs. 200/- p.m. was paid by the Senior Superintendent of Police, who occupied it as a tenant. The landlords never made any complaint that the rent received was inadequate. From 1953-58 the building was again occupied by another Superintendent of police who also paid the same rent of Rs. 200/-. The landlords again accepted it as the fair rent of the property. The annual reasonable rent of the premises under the U.P. (Temporary) control of Rent and Eviction Act was Rs. 125/- p.m. The appellants case never was that the property had been let out on a concessional rent. The court below thus rightly came to the conclusion that Rs. 200/- p.m. was the fair and reasonable rent of the property which had been bona fide agreed upon between the parties during the relevant period.
(2.) As observed earlier the property was requisitioned by the District Magistrate in the year 1958 and he offered compensation to the appellant at the rate of Rs. 225/- p.m. This offer was turned down by the appellant and a reference was made under Section 6 of the Requisition Act. The appellants were the claimants in the proceedings and they laid their claim at a sum of Rs. 2500/- p.m. on the allegation that the property was worth Rs. five lacs and the fair return of the property was the amount claimed on its potentialities. The State on the other hand pressed that the fair rent of the property being only Rs. 200/- p.m., the offer of Rs. 225/. p.m. was just and reasonable and was a fair compensation. Section 6 of the Act deals with compensation payable for requisition under the Act. Sub-Sec. (2) of Section 6 provides as under : "6. .... . . . (2) The Court in deciding the reference shall have regard to the provisions of sub-Sec. (1) of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in so far as the same may be applicable and also the reasonable expenses, if any, incurred in vacating the accommodation and shall as far as possible follow the procedure applicable to suits under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The decision of the Court shall have the force of a decree."
(3.) The question for determination before the court below was as to the amount of compensation payable for the premises which was a tenanted accommodation fetching a rent around Rs. 200/- for the last 15 years and over.;