(1.) This order will dispose of six revision petitions i.e., CR-4208- 2024, CR-4209-2024, CR-4210- 2024, CR-4211-2024, CR-4212-2024 andCR-4242-2024 as common questions of law and fact are involved in all the said cases. In all the six revision petitions, challenge is to the separate orders of the same date i.e. 19/7/2024 vide which the application(s) of the respondent-landlord for mesne profits has been disposed along with application for stay moved by the petitioner(s). With the consent of the parties, CR-4208-2024 is being taken up as the lead case.
(2.) Brief facts of the present case are that the respondent-landlord had filed six separate petitions for eviction under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 for ejectment of the petitioner(s)- tenant(s) from six different shops all situated in District Bathinda. The said shops are stated to be situated close to each other. In all the cases, vide separate orders dtd. 28/8/2023, the eviction petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 filed by the respondent- landlord was allowed and the petitioners were ordered to be evicted from the premises in question and were directed to vacate the said premises within a period of three months from the passing of the said order(s). Appeals were filed by all the petitioners against the said orders and along with appeal(s), application(s) for stay were also filed by the petitioners. The respondent-landlord had also filed application(s) for mesne profits in each of the six cases and the appellate authority as has been stated hereinabove, vide six different orders dtd. 19/7/2024 assessed the mesne profits to be Rs.22,000.00 per month and directed the petitioners to pay the same on the following terms and conditions:-
(3.) Learned counsels for the petitioners have jointly submitted that the amount of Rs.22,000.00 per month assessed by the appellate authority as being the amount of mesne profits is on the higher side inasmuch as it has been perversely observed that the prevailing rent for the same / similar building in the same locality is within the bracket of Rs.20,000.00 to Rs.50,000.00 per month. It is submitted that in fact the prevailing rate of rent in the locality is within the bracket of Rs.5,000.00 to Rs.10,000.00 per month. It is further submitted that even a perusal of the application dtd. 21/10/2023 filed for mesne profits would show that even as per the case of the respondent herein, the prevailing rent was around Rs.23,000.00 with respect to the similar shops and for the rent to be Rs.50,000.00, reference wasmade to only one shop of one Monudeep. It is stated that the said shop of Monudeep cannot even remotely be compared with the shops in question inasmuch as the said shop of Monudeep is a corner shop which is open from two sides and is well furnished and has a very good parking area. It is further stated that the said Monudeep Aggarwal is in fact the son of Kewal Krishan Aggarwal, who is one of the members of the present respondent Sabha and thus, the said document cannot be taken on its face value. It is submitted that the said shop is at a distance of more than 500 karams from the shop in question and is in thick commercial area and thus, no reliance can be placed upon the same. It is further submitted that as per paragraph 7 of the application of mesne profits, it is the case of the present respondent himself that the shops which are at a distance of about 5-6 shops from the shop in question had been rented out at an approximate rent of Rs.23,000.00p.m. and thus, the fact of a similar shop fetching rent of Rs.50,000.00 p.m. which is more than double the amount of rent of the shops of which reference has been made by the present respondent himself apparently is not comparable and should not be taken into consideration. Learned counsels for the petitioners have further referred to the rent note dtd. 29/2/2024 (Annexure P-4) and dtd. 6/10/2023 (Annexure P-5) to show that the rent of the property in the adjoining area is Rs.7000.00 and Rs.6000.00 respectively. It is thus prayed that mesne profits which have been awarded deserve to be substantially reduced.