State of Punjab Vs Darshan Kumar and Others

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.@mdashNotice of motion.

2. At this stage, Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate accepts notice and submits that he has got the instructions to argue the case today itself. Both the parties have been heard.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the learned Appellate Authority has committed an error of law in assessing the mesne profit without there being any evidence on record.

4. On the contrary, learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the registered lease deed dated 27.4.2006 of the adjoining SCO No. 2943 and 2944, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh has been placed on record as per which the said building has been rented out @ Rs. 1,82,325/- per month. He further submits that the learned Appellate Authority has awarded mesne profit only to the tune of Rs. 1 lacs, may be keeping in view the rent of the adjoining property.

5. In brief, the landlord filed eviction petition u/s 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short ''the Act'') for seeking eviction of the Petitioner from first and second floor of SCO No. 2941 and 2942, Sector 22C, Chandigarh on the ground of personal necessity. It was alleged that the demised premises is let out @ Rs. 50,995/- per month. The learned Rent Controller allowed the eviction petition vide its order dated 30.9.2010 against which the Petitioner filed statutory appeal along with application for stay which has been allowed by the learned Appellate Authority subject to payment of mesne profit of Rs. 1 lac with the rider that if at the time of final adjudication by the appellate or revisional court in respect of the damages or compensation payable by the tenant is found to be at variance with the provisional order then the landlord is liable to reimburse or refund the excess amount deposited by the tenant and in case of deficient deposit, the tenant shall be liable to make good the deficient amount. It is now well settled in the case of Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. Federal Motors Pvt. Ltd., that after the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller, relationship of landlord and tenant comes to an end and tenant becomes statutory tenant and is liable to pay mesne profit for use and occupation of the premises in his possession. The Appellate Authority while granting stay has ordered payment of Rs. 1 lacs as mesne profit for use and occupation of the demised premises during the pendency of the appeal which has been quantified on the basis of rent which is being paid by the tenant of the adjoining premises @ Rs. 1,82,325/- per month as per the registered lease deed pertaining to the year 2006.

6. In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any error in the order of the learned Appellate Authority and as such the same is hereby dismissed.