OBEROI TIMBER TRADERS Vs. NARBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CIVIL Revision (CR) No. 1258 of 2009 under Section 15 (6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short to be referred to as the '1973 Act') against the order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller and affirmed by the Appellate Authority, filed at the instance of tenant, is pending in this Court. The revision was admitted on 06.03.2009 and stay against dispossession was granted.

(2.) PRAYER in the instant application was made by the landlords for vacation of interim stay granted by this Court on 06.03.2009 or for directing the tenant to pay mesne profits for use and occupation of the tenanted premises. It was stated that both the authorities below have concurrently found that the petitionertenant is liable to be ejected on the ground of personal necessity. The market rate of such like premises was not less than Rs. 45/ - per sq. ft. The applicant -landlords relied upon four lease deeds of different properties in the same area (Annexure R -1 to Annexure R -4), for the years 2009, 2008 and 2006 etc., stating that the minimum lease amount as per these documents is Rs. 30/ - per sq. ft. It was further averred that vide communication (Annexure R -5) even the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad has fixed the annual rental value of the premises for the purposes of house tax at Rs. 4,95,689/ - (though, in the application the same was described as Rs. 5,50,765/ -). According to this calculation, the annual rent of the premises which is comprising of an area 440 sq. yards is more than Rs. 40,000/ - per month. The prayer was thus made for fixing the mesne profits according to the aforesaid documents.

(3.) IN the reply dated 17.05.2009/13.07.2009, it was stated that the properties covered under the lease agreements relied upon by the applicants cannot be compared with the demised premisses. Those properties are stated to be falling within 30 meters of the national highway and instances relied upon by the applicant -landlords are within the 'Lal Dora' and situated on the main Mathura road. It was further contended that unregistered lease deeds cannot form the basis of determination. It was further stated that three lease deeds i.e. Annexures R -1, R -2 and R -4 are relating to the property belonging to the same family. With regard to lease deed (Annexure R -3) dated 25.11.2006, it is stated that this relates to commercial building called Crown Plaza, which is fully air -conditioned shopping mall for which CLU was granted in the year 1999. The photographs showing the aforesaid shopping mall (Crown Plaza) is Annexure A -6. The petitioner -tenant has also relied upon Annexure A -7 which shows the condition of the disputed land and therefore, it was the contention of the petitionertenant that the location and potentiality of those properties are poles apart and there cannot be any such parity.