1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3845 OF 2002 Sau.Premalatadevi w/o Dhairyasheelrao Salunke Petitioner versus Kashinath Vithal Ganbote, since deceased through LRs and others Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.3844 OF 2002 Sau.Premalatadevi w/o Dhairyasheelrao Salunke Petitioner versus Ambadas Baburao Kandare and another Respondents Mr.G.S.Godbole for petitioner. Mr.P.R.Arjunwadkar for respondent. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 26th February 2010 PC : 1. I have heard submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in these petitions. These two petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment as facts leading to filing of the petitions are more or less identical. With a view to appreciate the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners, for the sake of convenience, it will be necessary to briefly refer to the facts of the case in writ petition no. 3845 of 2002. 2 2. The petitioner is the landlady and the respondents are the tenants. The writ petition arises out of proceedings for determination of standard rent. An application was made by the respondents for fixation of standard rent. Respondents are the tenants in respect of the suit premises more particularly described in the standard rent application. The suit premises consist of two rooms on the ground floor having size of 10x10 feet each. According to the case made out by the petitioner, each room in the suit premises was let out in the year 1935 at the monthly rent of 3 Silver Surti Rupees having the insignia of George, the Vth Emperor of India. The case made out by the respondents in the standard rent application was that earlier the rent was Rs.3/- p.m. which was later on increased to Rs.6/- p.m.. A demand was made by the petitioner in April 1988 of rent @ Rs.400/- p.m.. In fact a notice of demand was issued by the petitioner. The case made out in the application was that the rent demanded was exorbitant. 3 The application was opposed by the petitioner by contending that there was an agreement between the original landlady and the original tenant to pay the rent per room in the form of three silver surti rupees weighing one tola each and containing 91.60^ of pure silver. Thus, the contention was raised by the petitioner in the reply to the application for fixation of standard rent that the standard rent payable for the said two rooms in occupation of the respondents comes to the worth of 64 grams of pure silver. The contention raised in the reply was that the value of silver of 64 grams at that time was Rs.484/- and accordingly a demand 3 was made for fixing the rent at the said rate. 4. After a contest, the Trial Court allowed the application for standard rent. The Trial Court held that the standard rent was Rs.6/- p.m. along with the permitted increases of Rs.5.80/- p.m. payable from the date of filing of standard rent application. It appears that two separate revision applications were preferred by the petitioner for challenging orders passed in two separate applications for fixation of standard rent. By judgment and order dated 18th September 2001 both the revision applications were dismissed and the orders of the trial court fixing the standard rent and confirmed. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken me through the impugned judgments and orders. He submitted that the standard rent of Rs.6/- fixed by the Courts below is extremely on the lower side and no evidence was adduced by the respondents that the standard rent was Rs.6/- p.m.. He pointed out that the rent was payable in the form of silver coins and the standard rent payable for the said two rooms in occupation of the respondents comes to the worth of 64 grams of pure silver at the relevant time. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned orders are illegal. 6. The case of the petitioner was that the original tenancy was created in the year 1935 by the original owner and that the rent per room was in the form of three silver surti rupees weighing one tola each and containing 4 91.60^ of pure silver. While determining the standard rent, the form in which the standard rent was payable at the time of creation of tenancy is irrelevant and what is to be seen is what was the standard rent prevailing on the relevant date i.e. 1st September 1940. The Trial Court while dealing with the application for fixing of standard rent referred to the case made out by the petitioner. The Trial Court has also considered the evidence adduced by the parties as regards the nature of the suit premises and amenities provided therein. The Trial Court has come to the conclusion that as of 1st September 1940 the rent was Rs.6/- p.m.. The Trial Court found that the permitted increases @ Rs.5.80 p.m. is payable from the date of application. The Courts below were right in not accepting the case that the rent will be equivalent to the market value of silver surti rupee coin. Both the courts below have discarded the evidence of the two witnesses examined by the petitioner on this point on the ground that both the witnesses were school going boys when the tenancy was created. The trial court had noted the admitted position that the petitioner was recovering the rent at the rate of Rs.6/-per month in the year 1988. That is the reason why the standard rent was fixed at Rs.6 per month. There is no error committed by the courts below. 7. No case for interference is made out in writ jurisdiction. The writ petitions are rejected. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs. (A.S.OKA, J.)