MARTIN AND HARRIS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. RAJENDRA MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Plaintiffs/Respondents being the owners of the suit property situated at Plot No.1, Block No.D-1, Nagar Nigam No.2844 known as Khinduka Bhawan, New Colony, Jaipur filed a suit bearing No.4/2016 (9/2002) for eviction, possession, recovery of rent and permanent injunction. The said suit was filed in November 2002 invoking the Provisions of Sec. 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred as 'Old Act'). The suit was decreed vide judgment dtd. 3/6/2016 passed by Senior Civil Judge No.7, Jaipur. On filing the appeal bearing No.11/2016 before Additional District Judge No.10, Jaipur, it was dismissed on 10/1/2017 confirming the judgment of the Trial Court. The Second Appeal No.144/2017 was filed challenging both the judgments before the High Court which was admitted vide order dtd. 14/10/2017 granting stay on ejectment. The order of stay was extended time to time. On filing an application under Order XLI Rule 5 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC') by the Plaintiffs/Respondents asking mesne profit due to continuation of stay on eviction decree it was decided vide order dtd. 18/5/2018. Whereby the appellants were directed to pay the mesne profit @ Rs.2,50,000.00 per month from the date of filing of the application i.e. 20/12/2017 till disposal of the appeal. The directions have also been issued to deposit the arrears of mesne profits upto April 2018 by depositing the same in the bank account of the Plaintiffs within six months, with further direction to pay mesne profits from May 2018 consecutively by 15th date of every succeeding month. Failing to deposit the amount of mesne profit in future for four months consecutively, Plaintiffs would have right to get execute the decree of eviction. The Plaintiffs were granted liberty to withdraw the amount subject to furnishing surety and undertaking to re-deposit the mesne profits so withdrawn with 9% interest in case they lose in the second appeal. The said order was challenged by filing the Special Leave Petition No.19863/2018 before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Appellants to file review petition before the High Court. On filing the review petition bearing No.95/2018, it was dismissed vide order dtd. 1/4/2019 which led to file the present appeals challenging the order dtd. 18/5/2018 as well as the order passed in review dtd. 1/4/2019 questioning the grant of mesne profit.

(3.) The facts unfolded are that the Plaintiffs purchased the property through six different registered sale deeds executed on 23/12/1985. By virtue of those sale deeds, Plaintiffs became the owner of the tenanted premises. Appellants were tenant to the erstwhile owner and after selling the premises they became tenant of Plaintiffs/Respondents by attornment. Earlier a suit under Sec. 6 of the Old Act was filed by the Plaintiffs/Respondents against the Appellants bearing No.61 of 2002 for determination of the standard rent. During the pendency of the suit an application under Sec. 7 of the Old Act was filed for fixing the provisional rent which was decided vide order dtd. 9/1/2004 fixing provisional rent @ Rs.1,00,000.00 per month. The said order was challenged, which was confirmed by the High Court vide order dtd. 18/4/2007. The Appellants had filed a Special Leave Petition bearing No.9775 of 2007 wherein this Court fixed the ad hoc provisional rent @ Rs.60,000.00 per month vide order dtd. 12/11/2007 with direction to the Trial Court to decide the issue of standard rent expeditiously. The Trial Court vide judgment dtd. 12/8/2009 decreed the said suit and fixed the standard rent @ Rs.45,000.00 per month. The appeals filed by both the parties against the said order are pending before the High Court.