Delhi High Court
M/S Hindustan Motors Ltd. vs M/S Seven Seas Leasing Ltd. on 19 September, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RFA No. 792/2018
% 19th September, 2018
M/S HINDUSTAN MOTORS LTD.
..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Pruti Marwaha Gupta,
Advocate (Mobile No.
9810464514).
versus
M/S SEVEN SEAS LEASING LTD.
..... Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
C.M. Appl. No. 38155/2018 (for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
C.M. stands disposed of.
RFA No. 792/2018 and C.M. Appl. No. 38154/2018 (for stay)
2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant/tenant
impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 15.05.2018 whereby
the trial court has awarded mesne profits for the period 16.05.1998 to
31.08.1998 at the rate of Rs. 75/- per square feet, per month for the
ground floor and Rs. 65/- per square feet, per month for the mezzanine
floor as opposed to the agreed rate of rent of Rs. 31.51/- per square
feet, per month for the ground floor and Rs. 26.28/- per square feet,
per month for the mezzanine floor. The trial court has also awarded
interest on the decretal amount at 9% per annum.
3. I need not set out the facts in detail, except stating that
admittedly the appellant/defendant was a tenant in the property
comprising of 6433 square feet on the ground floor and 1820 square
feet on the mezzanine floor at Gulab Bhawan, 6, Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi. The tenancy of the appellant/defendant had
commenced on 12.03.1986 and the same was terminated vide Legal
Notice dated 10.04.1998. Appellant/Defendant has in the meanwhile,
during the pendency of the suit, for possession and mesne profit
handed over possession of the tenanted premises to the
respondent/plaintiff/landlord on 31.08.1999. The trial court was
therefore required to compute the mesne profits for the period
16.05.1998 to 31.08.1999. This aspect has been dealt with by the trial
court in paras 34-36 of the impugned judgment and these paras read as
under:-
"34. The reasons given while deciding issue no.1 be read as part
and parcel of this issue as the same are not being
reproduced herein for the sake of brevity and to avoid repetition.
35. The plaintiff led evidence of PW1, he being the
Director and constituted attorney of the plaintiff-company. He has
deposed with respect to the mesne profits in the area of
suit property and has also led evidence of PW2-Sh. Tilak Raj
Chopra, Accounts Manager of M/s Tirupati Services Ltd. to
prove the market rate of rent. PW2 has proved the account
statement of M/s Tirupati Services Ltd. from 01.04.1999 to
31.03.2000 and ledger of M/s Kailash Motors as Ex.PW2/2 and
Ex.PW2/3 respectively. PW2 has also proved TDS Certificates of
M/s Tirupati Services Ltd. for the year 2000 to 2003. From the
testimonies of PW1 and PW2, it stands proved that the rate of rent
per square feet per month in the area of the suit property was
around the same as claimed in the plaint.
36. Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits for the period of
16.05.1998 to 31.08.1998 @ Rs.75/- per square feet per month for
the ground floor and @ Rs.65/- per square feet per month for the
mezzanine floor of the suit property. The defendant paid the rent
@ Rs.31.51 per square feet per month for the ground floor and @
Rs.26.28 per square feet per month for the mezzanine floor during
the abovesaid period. Thus, the remaining amount @ Rs. 43.49
per square feet per month for the ground floor
admeasuring 6435 square feet and @ Rs. 38.72 per square feet per
month for the mezzanine floor admeasuring 1820 square feet for
15.5 months (i.e. from 16.05.1998 to 31.08.1999) is to be paid by
the defendant to the plaintiff which comes to Rs.
54,30,092.52 (Rs. 43,37,801.325 + Rs. 10,92,291.20). Thus,
the suit of the plaintiff is liable to be decreed for a sum of Rs.
54,30,092.52 along with pendente lite and future interest @ 9%
p.a. for unauthorized and illegal occupation."
(underlining added)
4. A reading of the aforesaid paragraphs show that the trial
court has relied upon the evidence led by PW2 with respect to the
premises in the same area and on the basis of the rent paid by the
tenant M/s Tirupati Services Ltd., the mesne profits have been
calculated. I may note that some amount of honest guess work is
always involved in calculation of mesne profits and therefore once rent
is taken of similar premises situated in the same area, I do not find any
illegality in the impugned judgment awarding mesne profits at Rs. 75/-
per square feet, per month for the ground floor and Rs. 65/- per square
feet, per month for the mezzanine floor.
5. The definition of mesne profits, contained in Section
2(12) of the CPC, provides that mesne profits include the interest
payable on mesne profits. Therefore, the trial court has committed no
illegality in awarding reasonable rate of interest of 9% per annum on
the decretal amount towards mesne profits.
6. I fail to understand the attitude of tenants who despite
termination of the tenancy, insist on continuing possession of the
tenanted premises, and thereafter, come shouting to courts seeking
reduction of mense profits, whereas, if the occupation of premises
were not convenient and the mesne profits were not to be paid, then
why would the tenants not immediately vacate, as per time period
provided in law, on receiving the notice of termination of tenancy.
There is no inherent right in citizens of this country, who are tenants,
to violate the law by overstaying in the premises where the tenancy
stands terminated.
7. Dismissed.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2018 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
AK
