ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA Vs. JAI KUMAR AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Ashok Kumar Sharma is aggrieved by the judgment dated 02.08.2010 passed by the Civil Judge, Central District - 04 Delhi in Suit No. 373/2006 whereby the suit for possession filed by the respondent/plaintiff of the front portion of basement in the premises bearing No. C -41/A, Hauz Khas, New Delhi -110016 and for recovery of arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 4000/ - p.m. from 01.09.1999 to 31.08.2000 along with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and a decree of recovery of damages at the rate of Rs. 6000/ - from the date of filing of the suit till the suit premises is vacated, was decreed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff as well as against the judgment and order dated 10.10.2011 passed by the ADJ - 01 South District Saket Courts in RCA No. 5/2011 whereby the judgment of the Trial Court was affirmed and upheld but with respect to claim of damages/mesne profits, the Trial Court judgment was modified to the extent that the respondent/plaintiff was found to be entitled to mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 16,000/ - p.m. from 01.09.2000 to the date of passing of the impugned judgment dated 02.08.2010 and at the rate of Rs. 20,000/ - p.m. from 03.08.2010 to the date when the property would be vacated.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff had filed a suit for possession of the front portion of the basement in property bearing no. C -41/A Hauz Khas New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as suit property) as well as for recovery of arrears of rent of Rs. 48,000/ - on the plea that the respondent/plaintiff is the owner of the suit property and had inducted the appellant/defendant in the front portion of the basement of the suit property on 01.09.2009 on a monthly rental of Rs. 4000/ - p.m. but the appellant/defendant failed to pay the rent and consequently, the tenancy was terminated from the midnight of 31.08.2000 by a legal notice dated 01.08.2000.

(3.) The aforesaid suit was contested by the appellant/defendant primarily on the ground that by virtue of an agreement/consent dated 07.01.1999 against a consideration amount of Rs. 15 Lakhs, the appellant/defendant was permitted to raise construction in the suit property. It was, thus, denied that the appellant/defendant was ever a tenant in the suit property.