1 wp4510.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.4510/2017
1. M/s. P.D.T. Trading Company,
through its Partner Shri Vishnu
S/o Pandurang Talmale,
aged about 47 Yrs., Occu. Business,
Off. At : Plot No.163, Small Factory
Area, Bagadganj, Nagpur - 440 008.
2. Shri Vishnu S/o Pandurang Talmale,
aged about 47 Yrs., Occu. Business.
3. Shri Praveen S/o Pandurang Talmale,
aged about 44 Yrs., Occu. Business,
Both R/o Behind J.N. Tata Parsi Girls
High School, Ganjipeth, Nagpur. ..Petitioners.
..Vs..
Shri Digant S/o Rajesh Shah,
aged about 28 Yrs., Occu. Architect,
R/o Bhojraj Gopaldas, Nehru Putla
Road, Itwari, Nagpur - 440 002. ..Respondent.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shri S.R. Bhongade, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri R.M. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.
DATE : 30.10.2017. ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Shri S.R. Bhongade, Advocate for the petitioners and Shri R.M. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.
::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 00:51:38 :::
2 wp4510.17
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The petitioners (judgment debtors) have suffered decree for eviction. The judgment and decree passed by the trial Court is challenged by the petitioners before District Court in appeal which is pending. In this appeal, the petitioners had filed an application praying that the effect, operation and execution of the decree passed by the trial Court be stayed. By the impugned order, the District Court has granted stay as prayed for by the petitioners, however, on condition that the petitioners shall deposit amount of compensation at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per month till June, 2017 within one month from 16th June, 2017 and further continue to pay Rs.1,50,000/- per month till 15th day of subsequent month, till the decision of the appeal. The petitioners being aggrieved by the condition of deposit as imposed by the District Court, have filed this petition.
4. The learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the rent of the premises in question was admittedly Rs.5,600/- per month and in view of this, the condition of deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- per month is unjustified.
5. The learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that the occupation charges, if determined as per ready reckoner, would come to about Rs.3,00,000/- per month, however, the District Court has directed the ::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 00:51:38 ::: 3 wp4510.17 petitioners to deposit Rs.1,50,000/- per month and, therefore, it cannot be said that the condition imposed by the District Court regarding deposit of amount is unjustified. It is argued that Court can rely on the ready reckoner to determine the occupation charges. To support this submission, learned Advocate for the respondent has relied on the following judgments:
(i) Judgment given in the case of Super Max International Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s. State of Maharashtra and another reported in 2009((2) Mh.L.J. 134 and
(ii) Judgment given in the case of State of Maharashtra and another V/s. Super Max International Private Limited and others reported in (2009) 9 SCC 772.
The proposition laid down in the above referred judgments is well settled and the ready reckoner may be relied upon to determine the amount of occupation charges, however, in the facts of the case, in my view the interests of justice would be sub-served by passing the following order:
(i) The petitioners shall deposit amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand) per month from 4th March, 2015 till 30th November, 2017.
(ii) The Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) as directed by this Court by the order passed on 14th July, 2017 is deposited and amount of Rs.5,600/- per month is also being deposited regularly. The amount which is deposited by the petitioners shall be adjusted and the petitioners shall deposit the balance amount till 30 th November, 2017 before the District Court, Nagpur where the appeal is pending.
(iii) The petitioners shall continue to deposit Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty
::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 00:51:38 :::
4 wp4510.17
Thousand) per month from December, 2017 till the disposal of the appeal. This amount shall be deposited till 10th of every month starting from December, 2017.
(iv) In addition, the petitioners shall furnish solvent surety for Rs.20,00,000/- (Rs. Twenty Lakhs) to the satisfaction of Registrar of District Court, Nagpur. This solvent surety shall be furnished till 30th January, 2018.
(v) On deposit of amount, the respondent / decree holder be permitted to withdraw the amount equivalent to Rs.5,600/- per month from 4th March, 2015 till disposal of the appeal.
(vi) The impugned order is modified in the above terms.
(vii) Writ petition is disposed accordingly. (viii) In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. (ix) It is clarified that the amount of occupation charges fixed under this
order will not affect the adjudication of claim of the decree holder or judgment debtors regarding mesne profits / compensation.
JUDGE Tambaskar.
::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2017 00:51:38 :::