M/S. Rani Pushpa Kumari Devi Thru ... vs The Embassy Of Syrian Arab ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 7220 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                           CS(OS) No.2409/1991

%                                                   December 17, 2012

M/S. RANI PUSHPA KUMARI DEVI THRU LR'S       ...... Plaintiff
                   Through: Mr. Kamal Mehta, Adv.


                            VERSUS

THE EMBASSY OF SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC         ...... Defendant
                 Through: Mr. Arindam Mukherjee with
                          Ms. Gargi Tuli, Advs.

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

    To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.

This is a suit which was filed by the plaintiff/landlady for

possession and mesne profits with respect to the premises 15, Palam Marg,

Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.

2. It is agreed before me by counsel for the parties that the

defendant has already vacated the suit premises on 4.4.2005. The tenancy

was terminated with effect from 1.1.1991 and therefore I have to calculate

the mesne profits payable by the defendant to the plaintiff from 1.1.1991 to

4.4.2005.

3. Issues in this case were framed on 29.1.1996. The only issue

therefore which I am called upon to decide is issue No.5 which reads as

under:-

"5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages/mesne profits? If so, from which date and what rate? OPD"

4. Counsel for the plaintiff admits that the plaintiff has not led any

evidence to prove the rate of rent prevalent from 1.1.1991 to 4.4.2005,

however, counsel for the plaintiff relies upon the judgment of this Court in

the case of M/s Marudhak Services Ltd. & Anr. vs. Ved Prakash & Anr.,

RFA No.374/2004 decided on 4th May, 2012 wherein I have held that where

there is no evidence of rent in a suit for mesne profits, a Court can grant with

respect to the residential premises increase of mesne profits at 10% per

annum cumulatively, unless, there is contrary evidence which is available on

record. Admittedly, even the defendant has led no counter evidence to show

what is the rate of rent during the relevant period of 1.1.1991 to 4.4.2005.

5. The last admitted rate of rent which was paid was `14,000/- per

month till 31.12.1990. Therefore, for every year from 1.1.1991, the plaintiff

will be entitled to a 10% cumulative increase in terms of the judgment in the

case of M/s Marudhak Services Ltd. & Anr.(supra). The plaintiff will also

be entitled to interest on the arrears of mesne profits at 12% per annum

simple in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Indian

Oil Corporation vs. Saroj Baweja, 2005(12) SCC 298.

6. Therefore, issue No. 5 is answered by giving to the plaintiff

mesne profits at the rate of `15,400/- per month with effect from 1.1.1991

till 31.12.1991 and with effect from 1.1.1992, and for every year thereafter,

there will be a cumulative 10% increase till 4.4.2005. The plaintiff will also

be entitled to interest on the arrears of mesne profits at 12% per annum and

which interest will be calculated from the end of the month for which mense

profits would be payable. If the defendant has paid any amount to the

plaintiff for this period, then before calculating arrears, the defendant will be

entitled to adjustment for the amount paid for that very month for which the

amount has been paid. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Decree sheet

be prepared accordingly.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J DECEMBER 17, 2012 ak