J.V. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS order will also dispose of Civil Revision Petition No. 3612 of 1986, as both the petitions arise out of the same order of the Appellate Authority dated August 18, 1986.
(2.) THE tenancy started on June 1, 1975 on a monthly rent of Rs. 206/ -. The landlord moved an application under Section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. for fixation of fair rent on January (Sic)0, 1981. The Rent Controller taking Rs. 206/ - the agreed rent to be the basic rent, fixed Rs. 230/ -, as the fair rent vide order dated January 11, 1984. Aggrieved against the said order of the Rent Controller, both the parties filed appeals. Therein, the learned Appellate Authority sent for the report from the Rent Controller vide order dated September 5, 1985, as to the market rate of rent prevailing at the time when the application for fixation of the fair rent was made. Against the said order of the Appellate Authority sending for the report, the tenant filed Civil Revision Petition No. 3480 of 1985 in this Court. The same was dismissed on April 2, 1986. The tenant approached the Supreme Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 12584 of 1985 and also filed S.L.P. (Civil) No. 5781 of 1986, against the judgment of this Court dated April 2, 1986. Both those cases were disposed of by the Supreme Court with the following orders on May 8, 1986, - - The Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed Special leave petition is dismissed with the reservation that the Petitioner would have liberty to raise the ground in appeal pending before the Court below. Subsequent thereto, the Appellate Authority vide order dated August 18,1986, modified the order of the Rent Controller and fixed the fair rent at the rate of Rs. 547.50 per month. Aggrieved against the said order, the landlord has filed Civil Revision Petition No. 3612 of 1986 whereas tenant Bhagwan Dass has filed Civil Revision Petition No. 2711 of 1986. The learned Counsel for the tenant -Petitioner submitted that in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Registered Firm M/s. Bhagwan Singh and Co. v. The Central Bank of India Branch at Kaithal, (1988 -1) P.L.R. 290, whereby the earlier judgment of this Court in Kailash Chander Jain v. Mool Raj Sandi 1982 (2) Rent. L.R. 274, was overruled, the agreed rent will be the basic rent and not the market rent, as found by the Appellate Authority . Thus, according to the learned Counsel, the fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller was the right one. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the landlord -Respondent submitted that the said Division Bench judgment of this Court will not be applicable to the facts of this case, because the matter has already come to the High Court in Civil Revision Petition No. 3480 of 1985. That was the petition filed against the order sending for the report from the Rent Controller. The said order of the Appellate Authority dated September 5, 1985, was maintained and the civil revision petition was dismissed on April 2, 1986. That being so, the said order of sending for the report from the Rent Controller had become final between the parties and simply because the subsequent judgment taking a contrary view had come into being, it could not be made applicable to the parties. In any case, argued the learned Counsel, even if the basic rent is to be taken at the rate of agreed rent, i.e., Rs. 206/ - per month, even on the calculations the rent would come to Rs. 309/ - per month and not Rs. 230/ - per month as found by the Rent Controller.
(3.) FACED with this situation, learned Counsel for the tenant submitted that the said order of the Appellate Authority dated September 5, 1985, had not become final between the parties in view of the Supreme Court order, re -produced above, dated May 8, 1986.;