VIJAY ANANT GANGAN Vs. ZENABIBI GULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By order dtd. 2/4/2018, the above Civil Revision Application was admitted. By order dtd. 5/11/2020, a learned Single Judge fied monthly compensation to be deposited by the Applicants at the rate of Rs.2,50,000.00 per month as a condition of stay of the eviction decree during pendency of the Civil Revision Application. The relevant portion of said order dtd. 5/11/2020 reads as under :

(2.) The learned Single Judge has relied on the said transaction of reversionary rights which is of the year 2008. The eviction decree is dtd. 4/5/2017. Thus the relevant date for determination of the compensation is 4/5/2017.

(3.) The above referred order dtd. 5/11/2020 of learned Single Judge was challenged before the Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No. 7774 of 2022. The Supreme Court by order dtd. 9/11/2022 set aside order dtd. 5/11/2020 of learned Single Judge. In paragraph 7 of the said order, it has been observed by the Supreme Court that, the approach adopted by the learned Single Judge is not a sound principle of law to form the basis for determining the compensation in this case. The Supreme Court observed that in the case of Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. vs. Federal Motors (P) Ltd.,(2005) 1 SCC 705. it has been held that, from the date of decree of eviction, the tenant is liable to pay mense profts or compensation for use and occupation of the premises at the same rate at which the landlord would have been able to let out the premises and earn rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises. The landlord is not bound by the contractual rate of rent effective for the period preceding the date of decree. The Supreme Court also observed that in the decision of State of Maharashtra and Anr. Vs. Super Mai International Private Limited and Ors.,(2009) 9 SCC 772. it has been held that in fiing the amount subject to payment which the eiecution of the order/decree is stayed, the Court would eiercise restraint and would not fi any eicessive, fanciful or punitive amount. It has been observed that while staying the eviction decree, the Court can direct the tenant to pay the compensation for use and occupation of the tenancy premises at the same rate at which the landlord would have been able to let out the premises and earn the rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises. The Supreme Court has also observed that in the present case, the learned Single Judge has not done that eiercise and has determined the compensation considering the market value/value at which original Respondent No.19 acquired the rights of the suit property for a sum of Rs.5.50 Crores and thereafter considering estimated return @ 6.5% per annum fied the compensation amount. It has been observed that the High Court was required to undertake eiercise and to determine the compensation at the same rate at which the landlord would have been able to let out the premises and earn rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises. The Supreme Court set aside, the said order dtd. 5/11/2020 of the learned Single Judge passed in Civil Revision Application No. 357 of 2017 and the matter is remanded back to the High Court to determine the compensation for the use and occupation of the premises in question, by the tenant/lessee, taking into consideration the observations made in the order of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has also allowed the parties to lead evidence with respect to the aspect regarding the rate at which the landlord/lessor, had been able to let out the premises and earn the rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises. The Supreme Court directed the High Court to complete the said eiercise within sii months from the date of the receipt of the order. The Supreme Court further directed that till a fresh decision on remand is taken by the High Court by way of interim arrangement and subject to further decision, that may be taken by the High Court, the Supreme Court directed the Applicants to deposit an amount of Rs.2,50,000.00 per month from the date of passing of the eviction decree. The Supreme Court also clarifed that said deposit shall be subject to the fnal decision/ determination of compensation on record by the High Court. It is not in dispute that the said amount of Rs.2,50,000.00 per month is deposited in this Court from the date of eviction decree as per the direction of the Supreme Court.