Calcutta High Court
Naseem Ahmed Khan vs Karnani Properties Ltd on 3 October, 2023
IA No. GA 3 of 2023
APD No. 7 of 2023
with
CS No. 162 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
In appeal from its
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Naseem Ahmed Khan
Versus
Karnani Properties Ltd.
Before:
The Hon'ble Justice I. P. MUKERJI
And
The Hon'ble Justice BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY
Date: 3rd October 2023
Appearance:
Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Altamash Alim, Advocate
Mr. Dilip Mukherjee, Advocate
Mr. Debapriya Gupta, Advocate
for the appellant
Mr. Sabyasachi Choudhury, Advocate
Mr. Biswanath Chatterjee, Advocate
Mr. Neelesh Choudhury, Advocate
Mr. Shaunak Mukhopadhyay, Advocate
Ms. Anuradha Podder, Advocate
for the respondent
The Court: Our judgment and order dated 1st August 2023
inter alia directing the appellant to pay ad hoc occupation charges at
the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month was taken by him to the Supreme
Court.
On 11th September 2023 the appellant withdrew the Special
Leave Petition before that Court. While allowing withdrawal of the
petition, the Supreme Court granted him leave to file before this Court
an application to determine how much occupation charges he would
have to pay pending hearing of the appeal. This liberty was granted by
the Court to the appellant on the learned counsel contending before
that Court that the tenants in the subject building were paying less
rent.
The second paragraph of the order of the Supreme Court is
noteworthy. It says that if such application is filed "The High Court
may consider the same objectively and pass appropriate orders".
Now such application having been made, a duty has been cast
upon this court to "objectively" assess the occupation charges pending
hearing of the appeal.
To enable us to do so a response from the respondent is also
called for.
Let affidavits be exchanged in this application according to the
following directions:
Affidavit-in-opposition be filed by 16th October 2023. Affidavit-
in-reply may be filed by 20th November 2023. List the appeal and the
connected application for hearing on 22nd November 2023, fairly at the
top.
In the application taken out by the appellant some evidence of
rent or occupation charges being paid by the occupants of the subject
building have been annexed.
Mr. Choudhury, learned advocate for the respondent submits
that those documents relate to rent or occupation charges paid by the
tenants or ex-tenants. The appellant is a rank trespasser. The market
rate of rent is over Rs.1,00,000/- per month.
At this interim stage a good guidance to the court is the order
dated 28th June 2019 in CO No. 4308 of 2008 (Karnani Properties Ltd.
vs. Rekha Lakhwani & Anr.). The case relates to a similar tenanted
area in the same premises. In the said order, it was inter alia stated
that the learned trial judge in that case on 6th September 2017 had
fixed Rs.5,000/- per month as occupation charges. It appears from the
narration of facts in the said order dated 28th June 2019 that
Rs.5,000/- per month occupation charges was approved by the High
Court.
Since the subject part of the property is more or less the same
area and the fixation of the occupation charges of Rs.5,000/- per
month was made in 2017, as an interim order strictly without
prejudice to the rights and contention of the parties, we direct that for
the time being, instead of Rs. 20,000/- the appellant shall pay
Rs.8,000/- per month as occupation charges in terms of our order
dated 1st August 2023.
The sum Rs.8,000/- is to be read in all parts of the order
dated 1st August 2023. The rest of the order shall remain intact.
Time to make the payment of Rs.3,00,000/- and the arrear
occupation charges under the order dated 1st August 2023 is extended
till 6th November 2023.
(I. P. MUKERJI, J.)
(BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY, J.)
R. Bose
