THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1623 of 2017
ORDER:
By way of this civil revision petition, the petitioners assail the orders of the XVII Junior Civil Judge-cum-Principal Rent Controller, City Civil Courts at Secunderabad, dated 30.03.2012. By the impugned orders, the application filed by the petitioners in I.A. No. 137 of 2008 in O.S. No. 372 of 1998 under Order XX Rule 12 CPC to appoint an Advocate- Commissioner and determine the mesne profits in respect of the suit schedule property for the period from January, 1998 to April, 2005 and pass a final decree in terms of such determination was allowed by fixing the mesne profits of Rs.3,89,172/- together with interest at 12% per annum thereon from 01.05.2005 to till the date of decree and at 6% per annum from the date of the decree till the date of realization. It is to be noted that thought the mesne profits were claimed till April, 2005, the trial Court, inadvertently, had calculated the same for the entire period of 12 months. Later, upon a review application filed by the respondent herein, the trial Court allowed I.A. No. 226 of 2013 in I.A. No. 137 of 2008 by order dated 27.03.2014 by restricting the determined amount for the year 2005 from 2 MGP, J C.R.P._1623_2017 66,300/- to Rs.21,000/- being the mesne profits for four months i.e., till April, 2005.
2. The revision petitioners are the plaintiffs and the respondent is the defendant in the suit. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the suit.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the suit in O.S. No. 372 of 1998 filed by the plaintiffs seeking eviction of defendant was decreed on 27.03.2011 with a finding that the question of determination of mesne profits to be determined by a separate application under Order XX Rule 12 C.P.C. The said judgment attained finality in view of dismissal of first appeal in A.S. No. 45 of 2001 on the file of I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad and S.A. No. 1316 of 2004 by this Court on 05.11.2004. On 01.05.2005, the defendant vacated the premises. Therefore, the plaintiffs filed the impugned application seeking determination of mesne profits from January, 1998 to April, 2005 at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per month. On contest by the defendant, the trial Court by the impugned order allowed the application determining the mesne profits as indicated above. On the ground that the 3 MGP, J C.R.P._1623_2017 determination of mesne profits by the trial Court is on lower side, the present civil revision petition is filed by the plaintiffs.
4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners, plaintiffs, submits that the trial Court has grossly erred in taking into account the old rent of Rs.2,579/- per month which is grossly low considering the fact that the schedule property is situated in a strategic commercial location. P.W.1 in his evidence clearly stated that the schedule premises, upon eviction of the defendant, was given on rent at Rs.70,000/- per month and considering the said evidence, the trial Court ought to have fixed the monthly rent at Rs.50,000/-.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent, defendant sought to sustain the impugned order contending that the fixation of mesne profits by the trial Court is reasonable and the same needs no interference by this Court.
6. In order to prove their case, the plaintiffs, got examined the plaintiff No. 3 as P.W.1 apart from marking Exs.A.1 to A.7. Exs.A.1 to A.7 are the bank statements of the plaintiffs for the period from 22.08.2005 to 31.03.2006. P.W.1 asserted that after eviction of the defendant, the schedule premises was let out to GKB Optolabs in the year 2005 and Exs.A.1 to A.7 4 MGP, J C.R.P._1623_2017 discloses the payment of rent made by said GKB Optolabs, which is at the rate of Rs.70,000/- per month. Therefore, based on the said documents, the plaintiffs sought for fixation of fair rent at Rs.50,000/- per month for determining the mesne profits to be paid for the period from January, 1998 to April, 2005 i.e., 88 months. However, the trial Court did not take into consideration the said evidence on the ground that the rent of Rs.70,000/- as reflected by Exs.A.1 to A.7 being paid by GKB Optolabs is not relevant as the rent to be fixed is for the period January, 1998 to April, 2005. Further, the trial Court relied on the last rent that was paid by the defendant at Rs.2,579/- and by giving enhancement thereto at 10% per annum, determined the mesne profits. Thus, the rent for the last month i.e. April, 2005 came to be fixed at Rs.5,525/-. At this stage, it is to be observed that as seen from Exs.A.1 to A.7, the premises, immediately after eviction of defendant i.e., in the month of May, 2005, was given on rent to GKB Optolabs at Rs.70,000/- per month. Thus, though the factual rent of the premises being fetched on eviction of the defendant is at Rs.70,000/- per month, the rent fixed by the trial Court for the relevant period stood at Rs.5,525/-, which, in the opinion of this Court, does not reflect the fair rent. Furthermore, although the plaintiffs 5 MGP, J C.R.P._1623_2017 claimed the rent at Rs.50,000/- per month, in the cross- examination, P.W.1 categorically admitted that the rent being paid by one of the old tenants (#95, Parklane, Tara) for similar premises is Rs.20,000/- per month since 2005. Taking into consideration the above evidence, this Court is inclined to fix the monthly rent for the year 1998 at Rs.12,000/- and inclined to enhance the rent at 10% per annum thereon for each subsequent year. Thus, calculating the rent on the above rate, the mesne profits for the period from January, 1998 to April, 2005 are fixed as under:-
For the year 1998, the rent is Rs.1,44,000/- (Rs.12,000 x 12) For the year 1999, the rent is Rs.1,58,400/- (Rs.13,200 x 12) For the year 2000, the rent is Rs.1,74,240/- (Rs.14,520 x 12) For the year 2001, the rent is Rs.1,91,664/- (Rs.15,972 x 12) For the year 2002, the rent is Rs.2,10,828/- (Rs.17,569 x 12) For the year 2003, the rent is Rs.2,31,912/- (Rs.19,326 x 12) For the year 2004, the rent is Rs.2,55,108/- (Rs.21,259 x 12) For the year 2005, the rent is Rs.93,540/- (Rs.23,385 x 04)
4. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed in part. The impugned order of the trial Court is modified by enhancing the mesne profits from Rs.3,43,872/- to Rs.14,59,692/- for the period from January, 1998 to April, 2005 while maintaining the 6 MGP, J C.R.P._1623_2017 order in all other respects. The respondent, defendant is directed to pay the mesne profits, as determined above, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In default, the revision petitioners are at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings seeking realization of the said amount. No costs.
Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI 20th November, 2023 Tsr