19. In this backdrop, the District Court has rendered a finding on facts that undisputedly the respondent no.1 was regularly paying rent in accordance with the lease agreement and that the dispute arose when the Village Panchayat unilaterally increased the rent. According to the respondent no.1, such unilateral increase of the rent by the Village Panchayat was wholly illegal and not supported by any provision of law. It is also recorded that there is doubt as to whether the provisions of The Goa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988, are applicable for determining fair rent or the provisions of the Rent Control Act would apply. Apart from this, it is found that when the respondent no.1 sent cheques for payment of rent they were returned by the Village Panchayat and it stuck with its demand on the basis of the unilateral increase of the quantum of rent. It is in this backdrop that the District Court found that increase of rent was yet to be determined by the competent authority to be justified and there was a dispute as to whether the increase of rent could be on the basis of an estimate provided by the Public Works Department. On this basis, it was found that till the dispute regarding increase of rent and the applicable law was resolved, the true figures of arrears of rent could not be said to have been determined. Till such time, the respondent no.1 could not be held to be in arrears of rent to have incurred the disqualification under Section 10(d) of the said Act.
