Kunverji v. Sizya Misc. Civ. App. 1-M-70; 2711/70; El-Kindy Ag. J.

 

Kunverji  v. Sizya  Misc. Civ. App. 1-M-70; 2711/70; El-Kindy Ag. J.

         The appellant/tenant applied to the Rent Tribunal for determination of the standard rent of the premises; enter an order authorizing the appellant to carry out repairs and to permit him to deduct the costs thereof from the rent payable to the respondent/landlord. He claimed to have been in the premises since 1950 at a rent of Shs.100/=per month which was increased to Shs.150/= per month at the time of the application. The tribunal heard the application in the absence of the appellant who did not appear although he had been served. They visited the premises and noted that some places needed repair and valued the house of six rooms built with cemented blocks at Shs.25, 000/=. They fixed the rent at Shs.200/= per month. It was argued on appeal that the Tribunal could not assess or re-assess the rent until it had decided what the main user of the house was.

                        Held:  (1) “I think there is some merit in this argument because different consideration would apply when it is decided that the main user was commercial or residential.  Where the main user was commercial the standard rent would be as it was on the 1^st January, 1965, which is the prescribed date, and where the main user was residential the standard rent would be as it was on the prescribed date i.e. 1^st July 1959.  (See section 2 of Rent Restriction Act 1962, Cap.479). In this case the Tribunal did not decide the issue of main user. In my view it was necessary firstly to decide the issue of main user, secondly the prescribed date, thirdly make a finding of rent as it was on the prescribed date, and then fourthly fix the rent of the premises as prayed for. These findings were not made, and therefore it is difficult to support the Tribunal’s finding.” (2)  Case remitted to the Tribunal for rehearing.