JAGAT NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision application by the plaintiffs against an order of Munsif Barmer dismissing their suit for enhancement of rent brought by them under sec. 11 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that the rent had already been determined under the Marwar House Rent Control Act 1949, which was confirmed on appeal by the learned District Judge, Balotra.
(2.) THE premises in question consisted of two shops which were constructed afresh and let out for the first time after 1st January, 1946 to the defendants in May 1948 at an agreed rent of Rs. 55/-per month. After the coming into force of the Marwar House Rent Control Act 1949, the Collector fixed the fair rent of the premises under that Act at Rs. 20/- per month on 3. 1. 50. A revision application was filed against that order which was rejected by the Board of Revenue on 5. 2. 54. THE present suit was then instituted on 6. 2. 56 for the enhancement of rent to Rs. 55/- per month under sec. 11 of the present Act. THE court below held that the Marwar House Rent Control Act 1949 being one of the Acts repealed under sec. 30 (1) of the Act the fair rent demand under it by any authority could not be disturbed in view of the second proviso to sub-sec. (2) of the sec. 6 of the Act which runs as follows : - "provided further that where the fair rent or standard standard rent for any premises has been determined or redetermined by any authority under any law or order repealed by sec. 30 of this Act and the amount of such fair rent or standard rent is the same as would be determinable as rent by the court under this section, the fair rent or standard rent previously determined or redetermined shall not be disturbed. " In my opinion this proviso has been misinterpretd. It only lays down that if the amount as determined under the present Act under sec. 6 conies to the same amount as the fair rent determined under the old Act then the determinatian under the old Act shall not be disturbed. It does not lav down that the court is prevented from fixing the standard rent at an amount higher than the fair rent fixed under the old Act, in case the court conies to the finding that the standard rent under sec. 6 of the Act comes to a higher amount. Sec. 30 of the Act deals with repeals and savings. Sub-sec. (1) of it which is relevant for the present case runs as follows ; - "the United States of Rajasthan Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Ordinance, 1948, the Matsya Premises (Rent Control) Ordinance, 1948, the Jaipur Rent Control order 1947, the Marwar House Rent Control Act, 1949, the Sirohi State Rent Restriction Act, 1944, and other corresponding laws of the covenanting States dealing with the control of rents and eviction shall be repealed with effect from the date on which this section comes into force: Provided that anything done or action taken before such date under the laws hereby repealed shall, until varied or suspended under this Act, continue and be deemed to have been clone or taken, as the case may be, under or in pursuance of this Act as if it were then in force. " The proviso only provides that the fair rent determined under the old Act shall continue till it is varied under the present Act. A perusal of sec. 11 of the Act shows that even the standard rent fixed under the present Act can be enhanced under sec. 6 at a furthre time. This section runs as follows : - "procedure for increase in rent: (1) Where the landlord wishes to increase the rent of any premises he shall give the tenant notice of his intention to make the increase, and in so far as such increase is permissible under this Act, it shall be due and recoverable only in respect of the period after the end of the month in which the notice is given. (2) Every notice under sub-sec (1) shall be in writing signed by or on behalf of the landlord. (3) If the tenant does not agree to the increase specified in the notice given under subsec. (1) or fails to respond to it within a month of the receipt thereof, the landlord may bring a suit for increase in rent or standard rent in the lowest court of competent jurisdiction. (4) The court shall, after such summary in quiry as it may think necessary, make order according to law, and a decree shall follow. " Sub-sec. (3) provides expressly that even standard rent fixed under the Act can be enhanced. "standard rent" as defined in sec. 3 (vi) means the rent determined in accordance with the provisions of the Act. If the standard rent fixed under the present Act be enhanced under sec. 11 there is no reason why the rent fixed under the Marwar House Rent Control Act 1949 cannot be enhanced provided the standard rent determined in accordance with the provisions of sec. 6 works out at a higher figure than the fair rent fixed under the old Act. I accordingly allow the revision application, set aside the decree of the court below and remand the suit to the trial court for decision in accordance with law. The respondents did not appear to contest it. The applicants shall bear their own costs. .;