// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6185/2004 Nand Lal S/o Moola ...Petitioner Versus Thakurji Shri Govind Devji Maharaj Birajman Mandir, Anaj Mandi, Karauli through Manager and next friends Date of Order ::: 18.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Hari Krishan Sharma, Counsel for petitioner Shri J.P. Goyal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for both the parties. Plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for determination of standard rent of the disputed shop under Section 6 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 against the defendant-petitioner in the trial court along-with an application under Section 7 of the Act for determination of provisional rent during the pendency of the suit. It was pleaded on behalf of the plaintiff that agreed rent of the disputed shop is Rs.120/- per month, and that should be increased to Rs.2,000/- per month. It was also prayed by them that the provisional rent may also be determined at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month. The application was contested by the defendant. The trial court, after hearing both the parties, vide order dated 3rd January, 2004, determined the provisional rent at the rate of Rs.880/- per month from the date of filing of the suit till 31st December, 2003, and Rs.1,000/- per month thereafter. The order of the trial court was upheld by the appellate court in an appeal filed by the defendant. The orders passed by the trial and appellate court have been challenged in this writ petition by the defendants. During the pendency of this writ // 2 // petition, this Court, vide order dated 24th March, 2005, after hearing both the parties, directed that a sum of Rs.5,00/- per month may be deposited as provisional rent during the pendency of this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the trial court has fixed Rs.500/- as provisional rent of the other shops, which are adjacent to the present shop, whereas the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the provisional rent of Rs.1000/- determined in respect of another shop has been upheld by this Court in another writ petition. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for both the parties have agreed that without prejudice to their respective rights to be determined by the trial court at the time of final decision of the case, the defendant- petitioner will now pay Rs.750/- per month in place of Rs.500/-, as directed by this Court on 24.03.2005, as provisional rent with effect from 1st January, 2008 during the pendency of the suit before the trial court. The difference of the amount for the month of January and February, 2008, will be paid along-with the amount of rent for the month of March, 2008. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and, as agreed by both of them, I modify the orders passed by both the courts below and direct that the petitioner has already paid Rs.500/- per month as provisional rent, as directed by this Court vide order dated 24.03.2005, and the defendant-petitioner will now pay the provisional monthly rent at the rate of Rs.750/- with effect from 1st January, 2008 during the pendency of the suit before the trial court. The difference of amount of provisional rent for the month of January and February, 2008, will be paid along-with the amount of monthly rent for the month of March, 2008. However, this order will not affect the rights of either party while deciding the suit finally on the basis of evidence led on behalf of both the parties. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 3 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.5319/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6185/2004 Nand Lal S/o Moola ...Petitioner Versus Thakurji Shri Govind Devji Maharaj Birajman Mandir, Anaj Mandi, Karauli through Manager and next friends Date of Order ::: 18.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Hari Krishan Sharma, Counsel for petitioner Shri J.P. Goyal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- In view of the order passed in the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, also stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//