RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter has come up on interim application No.5217 dated 13th February, 2017filed by the plaintiff-respondent under Order 41, Rule 5 read with section 151 CPC for grant of mesne profits.

(2.) This Court vide order dated 31st October, 2001 while admitting the appeal stayed the execution of the decree passed by the courts below. Now, the respondent-applicant filed the present application under Order 41, Rule 5 CPC claiming Rs. 8,000/- per month as mense profit. To substantiate the claim, the plaintiff-respondent has produced the copies of two rent deeds executed by Shri Sohan Singh Meena in favour of Shri Ram Kumar and Ranveer Kumar Sharma in favour of Krishna Kumar respectively. Affidavits of Sohan Singh Meena, Ranveer Kumar Sharma, Krishan Murari and Ram Kumar and the rent receipt issued by Krishan Murari have also been produced on record by the respondents.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant plaintiff respondent that the shop in question is situated at Sepau Road, Badi, District Dholpur and the shops in the nearby vicinity have been let out on monthly rent of Rs. 8,000/-. It is also submitted that both the courts below have passed the decree of eviction against the defendant appellant and, therefore, the appellant is in wrongful possession of the property in dispute. The respondent applicant is entitled to get the mesne profit at the prevailing market rate in the area. In support of his submissions, Shri JP Goyal, learned senior counsel for the plaintiff respondent has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Atma Ram Properties(P) Ltd. v. M/s. Federal Motors Pvt. Ltd. 2005 (1) SRJ 320.