FAIR DEAL TENT HOUSE Vs. HARPREET SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common order, Civil Revision No. 3802 of 2010 preferred by tenants M/s. Fair Deal Tent House and others and Civil Revision No. 4306 of 2010 preferred by the landlords shall be disposed of together.

(2.) BOTH the tenants and landlords are aggrieved against the order dated 22.5.2010 passed by the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh whereby while granting the stay of execution, Rs. 20,000/- has been fixed as mesne profits payable by the tenants to the landlords. Filing of revision petitions by the tenants and the landlords depict one thing that both are not satisfied with the mesne profits determined by the Appellate Authority. The tenants pray for decrease in the amount, whereas the landlords pray for enhancement.

(3.) MR . K.S. Dadwal, learned counsel appearing for the tenants has stated that the ratio of law laid down in M/s. Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. v. M/s. Federal Motors Pvt. Ltd., 2005(1) R.C.R.(Civil) 212 : 2005(1) R.C.R.(Rent) 1 : 2005(1) S.C.C. 705 is not attracted to the facts of the present case, as the above said judgment pertains to Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, where no power is vested in the Appellate Authority to stay the proceedings and the Appellate Authority in Delhi had to rely upon the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, whereas under Section 15(2) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (as applicable to Chandigarh), a specific power has been vested in the Appellate Authority to grant the stay. Counsel states that power of stay vested in the Appellate Authority in Punjab is not subjected to any condition and the Appellate Authority has unfettered power to grant stay.