VIJAY KUMAR RAJPUT Vs. SURMUKH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition that has been filed seeking to challenge the assessment @ Rs.12,000.00 per month as mesne profit.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the tenant argues that the Appellate Authority has erred in holding mesne profit to be Rs.12,000.00per month without considering the fact that the initial rate of rent was Rs.200.00 per month. It is argued that the Rent Controller himself by his order dtd. 29/8/2017 assessed the mesne profit @ Rs.3,000.00 per month and, therefore, there was no basis for the Appellate Authority to have arrived at a conclusion that rent for the booth would be Rs.12,000.00 per month. It is also argued that the landlord-respondent herein is not entitled to claim the said rent on account of the fact that booth in question now stands acquired by GMADA and if rent has to be paid, it should be deposited with GMADA so that the petitioner is not fastened with the liability for the use and occupation of the booth till actual physical possession is taken by GMADA.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent vehemently opposes the instant revision petition by arguing that the Rent Controller has rightly assessed the market rent based on two rent notes which had been produced on the record as is reflected in the impugned order. It is further contended that even though GMADA has acquired such premises, he is still the landlord and is entitled to retain rent which is payable by the petitioner, who is a tenant under him. It is further contended that as on date GMADA has not taken the possession of the booth from the respondent.