Neeraj Jugalkishore Sarda S/O ... vs Sumit Babulalji Bhange, Thr. L.R. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13560 Bom

1/2                                                                           16.wp.3399.2021.odt



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                            WRIT PETITION NO. 3399 OF 2021
                      (Neeraj Jugalkishore Sarda V/s Sumit Babulalji Bhange)


Office   Notes,    Office                         Court's or Judge's orders
Memoranda of Coram,
Appearances,      court's
orders or directions and
Prothonotary's orders


                                       Mr. Arjun Jain (Raoka), Advocate for Petitioner.
                                                         ------

                                       CORAM      : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

                                       DATE       : SEPTEMBER 21, 2021.

                 .                Heard Mr. Jain, learned Counsel for the Petitioner,

who challenges the order dated 10/8/2021 passed by the learned appellate court upon an application below Exhibit-5, seeking stay of the Judgment and decree of eviction as passed by the learned Small Causes Court in Regular Civil Suit no.236/2013, wherein the stay has been granted, subject to the payment of occupational charges of Rs.10,000/- as against the sum of Rs.150/- per month, which was payable on account of rent.

2. The learned Counsel submits, by relying upon State of Maharashtra V/s Super Max International Private Limited and Others, (2009) 9 Supreme Court Cases 772 that the occupational charges have been fixed at a very lower rate by the

2/2 16.wp.3399.2021.odt

learned appellate court, in spite of the rent valuation report from the Government approved Valuer, being placed on record, which indicated that the rent would be Rs.1,00,000/- per month in respect of the subject property. He, therefore, submits that for non-consideration of the said position, the impugned order cannot be sustained.

3. In Super Max International Private Limited (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has held, that balanced view and objective approach has to be undertaken while fixing the occupational charges. It is to be considered that as the tenant equally has a right of appeal, which having been filed, has to be decided on its own merits, and the condition of stay ought not to be of such a nature so that it would become impossible for performance for the tenant, which would result in his loosing possession due to non-compliance of the condition. In the instant case, the increase from Rs.150/- per month, which was paid by the tenant to Rs.10,000/- per month is an increase of approximately 66 times, then what was originally paid as rent by the tenant. However, placing reliance upon the rent valuation report, it is contended, that the said increase is a merely 10% of what the actual rental value would be there in the locality, considering which, issue notice to the Respondent, returnable in two weeks.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Yadav VG