Smt. Sheela Gupta vs J. Mitra & Co. Ltd.
2011 Latest Caselaw 612 Del

*                IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                                  RFA No. 86/2001


%                                                      2nd February, 2011

SMT. SHEELA GUPTA                                          ...... Appellant
                                   Through:     None

                             VERSUS


J. MITRA & CO. LTD.                                        ...... Respondents
                                   Through:    None


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

         1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be
            allowed to see the judgment?

    2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?

    3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.         This case is on the Regular Board of this Court since 3.1.2011. No one

appears for the parties although it is 2.45 p.m. This case is effective item

no.3 on the Regular Board of this court today. I have therefore perused the

record and I am proceeding to dispose of the matter.

2.         The challenge by means of this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908, is to the impugned judgment and decree dated

16.11.2000 whereby two aspects have been challenged, one being the claim

of higher mesne profits and the second being the grant of interest on arrears

of mesne profits.
RFA No.86/2001                                                         Page 1 of 3
 3     By   the   impugned     judgment     and   decree,    the   suit   of   the

appellant/landlord was decreed against the respondent/tenant for possession

and mesne profits at Rs.7320/- per month from the date of termination of

tenancy. The admitted rate of rent was Rs.3660/- per month. In the appeal,

the appellant has prayed that since the witness of the respondent/defendant

in his deposition admitted the prevailing rate of rent as Rs.25-30 per sq. ft. in

the year 1998, the court should have granted atleast such rate of mesne

profits instead of giving only the double of mesne amount of rent. It is also

urged in the appeal that since the arrears of mesne profits have been found

to be due, and the appellant has been deprived the use of monies, interest

ought to have been granted.

4     I think the appeal deserves to succeed. The trial court has illegally and

perversely not considered the admission of the respondent's own witness

that the prevailing rent in the area of the tenancy premises, which is at

Nehru Place, was Rs.25-30 sq. ft. in the year 1998. The trial court has noted

this aspect of the witness DW-1 testifying so, however, still damages have

only be granted at double the rent i.e. at Rs.7320/- per month. Accordingly, I

allow the appeal and partly modify the impugned judgment and decree

whereby it is ordered that the appellant will be entitled to mesne profits at

Rs.30 per sq. ft. for the tenanted premises from 1st May, 1997 till the date of

delivery of possession.

5     The trial court has also granted interest at 6% per annum on the

pendente lite mesne profits till realization. It appears that this aspect has

however been missed out in operative part of the judgment. I therefore
RFA No.86/2001                                                     Page 2 of 3
 direct that on the mesne profits at Rs.30 per sq. ft. which I decree in favour

of the appellant and against the respondent, the appellant will be entitled to

interest at 6% per annum simple, which would be calculated and payable

from the last date of the month for which the mesne profits/damages would

be payable.

      The appeal is disposed of as partly allowed. Decree sheet be prepared.

Trial court record be sent back.




FEBRUARY 2, 2011                                VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

ib