JITENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Vs. GOVIND NARAIN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes up on an application (1/30/4/2022) for grant of mesne profits to respondent defendant Govind Narain, who had succeeded before the trial court vide judgment dtd. 2/9/2021, passed by Additional District Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan, which judgment has been stayed by this court in the first appeal vide order dtd. 4/3/2022.

(2.) The facts of the case are that vide judgment dtd. 2/9/2021 the trial court while dismissed the appellant-plaintiff's suit for partition and permanent injunction decreed the counter claim of respondent defendant Govind Narain for possession of the property in issues. The plaintiff was also directed to remove the pillar and other possession from ground floor and first floor and to hand over possession to defendant. Till handing over possession of the portion to defendant the plaintiff was directed to pay mesne profits to defendant Rs.100.00 per month from April, 2019. Since, execution of the judgment has stayed, the defendant has filed the present application.

(3.) It has been submitted that there is finding against the plaintiff that he is a trespasser and continues in use and occupation of the suit property, therefore the trial court has fixed the mesne profits Rs.100.00 per month from April, 2019. It has been submitted that the suit property, which is in use and occupation of the plaintiff can carry much rent and a prayer for mesne profits was made for Rs.10,000.00, but due to escalation in prices and increase in the market value of suit property the mesne profits should be Rs.25,000.00 per month, but now due to interim order dtd. 4/3/2022 the plaintiff is allowed to be in use and occupation of the property further, therefore mesne profits should be fixed now as Rs.37,000.00. The defendant has placed on record the valuation report and submitted that property of such valuation can fetch rent of about Rs.25,000.00. Counsel for defendant submitted that rent in vicinity ranges about Rs.25,000.00 per month. The defendant has also placed on record his expenses for maintaining his parents of spending Rs.10,000.00 per month, while the plaintiff is not spending any money for meeting expenses of parents. Similarly has stated about criminal activities by plaintiff, for which criminal cases has also been registered against plaintiff. Counsel has submitted that while staying the operation of the impugned judgment and allowing plaintiff to be in use and occupation of the suit property, a reasonable condition may be imposed by fixing suitable and reasonable amount of mesne profits and prayed to fix it as Rs.37,000.00 per month.