JUDGMENT
N.K. Kapoor, J.
1. This revision petition is against the order of the appellate authority, Rohtak, whereby the application of the respondent under Section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act. 1973, has been allowed, thus raising the monthly rent from Rs. 50/- to Rs 117/-.
2. Briefly put, Gaja Nand filed an application under Section 4 of the Act for fixation of fair rent against Muraritenant. According to the landlord, the shop in dispute was constiucted in the year 1940 and that Murari is a tenant at the monthly rent of Rs. 50/- since 1962. It was further alleged that the rate of rent of similar shop in the locality is Rs. 600/- per month and no fair rent of the disputed premises has been fixed so far. The tenant put in appearance, controverted the averments made in the petition.
3. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed : –
(1) What the basic rent ? OPA
(2) What the fair rent ? OPA
(3) Whether petition is not maintainable in the present form ? OPR
(4) Relief.
4. The Rent Controller decided issue No. 1 in favour of the petitioner. Issue No. 2 was also decided in favour of the petitioner holding the rate of rent at Rs. 50/- per month which was being paid by the tenant to the landlord and further held that it is the fair rent of the premises in dispute. Since the Rent Controller held the rent which was being paid by the tenant to be the fair rent of the disputed premises, the application was dismissed.
5. The appellate Court considering the monthly rent of Rs. 50/- as the basic rent in the year 1962, determined the fair rent premissible under Section 4 of the Act on the basis of wholesale price index. According to the wholesale price index, in the year 1962 it was 104.1 and in the year 1985, i e, before the institution of the present application, it was 640.2. This way the rise was about 536.1 in the wholesale price index. Under Section 4(3) of the Act, 25% of the increase in the price index can be allowed in fixing the fair rent of the premises in dispute This way the increase permissible comes to 134% of Rs. 50/- per month i.e. say increase of Rs. 67/- i e. fair rent of the shop to be Rs. 50/- + Rs. 67/- = Rs. 117/- per month. This finding of the lower appellate Court is being challenged in this revision petition. According to the counsel, the appellate authority erred in law in fixing the fair rent at Rs. 117/-.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on the record. Admittedly, the petitioner was paying a sum of Rs. 50/- per month in the year 1962 and this was rightly to be taken to be the basic rent for the purpose of Section 4 of the Act. The increase in the basic rent/agreed rent as has been calculated by the appellate authority on the basis of wholesale price index has not been shown to be wrong in any manner. In fact, the appellate authority had calculated the increase in terms of the Division Bench judgment in case reported as Gela Ram v. Sat Pal Sharma, (1988-2) 94 P. L. R. 35 (D. B.).. No error is discernible on facts or law. This revision petition is without merit and is accordingly dismissed. The parties will, however, bear their own costs.