Davinder Singh vs Sanjiv Kumari And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 14514 P&H

CR-5242-2022(O&M)                              -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

                                CR-5242-2022(O&M)
                                Date of decision:-16.11.2022

Davinder Singh

                                                                 ...Petitioner
                   Versus

Sanjiv Kumari and another


                                                               ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S.MADAAN

Present:     Mr.Ankit Gupta, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

                   ****

H.S. MADAAN, J.(ORAL)

1. On petitioners - landladies Sanjiv Kumari and Sunita Kumari

having brought a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Rent

Restriction Act, 1949 against respondents/tenants Davinder Singh and

Lakhwinder Singh seeking their ejectment from the demised shop

situated at Main Bazar, Urmurh Tanda, Tehsil Dasuya, District

Hoshiarpur, notice of that petition was given to the respondents, who put

in appearance and contested the petition. Issues on merits were framed.

The parties were afforded adequate opportunities to lead evidence in

support of their respective claims.

2. After hearing arguments, learned Rent Controller, Dasuya

vide order dated 11.4.2022 accepted the rent petition and directed the

respondent/tenant to hand over the vacant possession of demised shop to

petitioner within two months from the date of order, otherwise the

petitioner could get the possession through intervention of the Court.

                                      1 of 4

 CR-5242-2022(O&M)                            -2-

3. Respondent/tenant Davinder Singh preferred an appeal

against the ejectment order passed by the Rent Controller, Dasuya. During

the course of those proceedings, the landladies filed an application for

payment of mesne profit at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month during the

pendency of the appeal contending that the rate of rent for similar type of

shops like that of the demised shop in the locality was Rs.20,000/- per

month, whereas the appellant/tenant had been paying rent at the rate of

Rs.170/- per month, therefore, he be asked to pay the mesne profits at the

rate of Rs.20,000/- per month.

4. The application was resisted on behalf of the appellant/tenant

stating that the respondents/landladies are not entitled to get any mesne

profit and rate of the rent in the area is on very low side and many shops

are lying vacant. He prayed for dismissal of the application.

5. After hearing arguments, learned Appellate Authority,

Hoshiarpur accepted the application and granted mesne profits at the rate

of Rs.2,500/- per month.

6. Feeling aggrieved by the said order passed by the Appellate

Authority, Hoshiarpur, the appellant/tenant has filed the present revision

petition praying that the same be accepted and the application filed by the

landladies for grant of mesne profits be dismissed.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist besides going

through the record and I find that the revision petition is absolutely

without any merit.

8. As it transpires from the record that learned Rent Controller,

Dasuya had ordered ejectment of the respondent/tenant Davinder Singh,

2 of 4

CR-5242-2022(O&M) -3-

who is revisionist before this Court. He has preferred an appeal before

Additional District -cum - Appellate Authority, Hoshiarpur, which is

pending. The rate of rent comes out to be Rs.170/- per month. After

passing ejectment order against the tenant, his possession cannot be held

to be legal and he cannot insist to pay rent at the rate of Rs.170/- per

month to the landladies when the prevalent rate of rent in the locality is

much more. The tenant is certainly liable to pay some amount towards

mesne profit to the landladies. The Appellate Authority, Hoshiarpur by

properly analysing the factual and legal position has fixed the mesne

profits at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month, though the claim made by the

landladies at the rate of Rs.20,000/-. The stand taken by the

appellant/tenant that he is liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs.170/- per

month only with no liability of making any payment to the landladies

towards mesne profits is entirely wrong. He is liable to pay mesne profits

and such profits fixed at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month cannot be said to

be on higher side.

9. The order passed by the Appellate Authority, Hoshiarpur is

quite detailed and well reasoned. The order does not come out to be

suffering from any illegality or infirmity much less apparent on the face of

it. In the impugned order, judgment by the Apex Court i.e. M/s Atma

Ram Properties (P) Ltd. Versus M/s Federal Motors Pvt. Ltd. 2005(1)

ACJ, 426(SC) has been referred, wherein it was observed that the tenant

continuing in occupation of the tenancy premises after the termination of

tenancy is an unauthorized and wrongful occupation and decree for

damages or mesne profit can be passed for the period of such occupation

3 of 4

CR-5242-2022(O&M) -4-

till the date he delivers the vacant possession to the landlord.

10. The order is certainly not perverse or passed in an arbitrary

manner. The revisional jurisdiction of this Court is quite limited and

considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to

interfere with the impugned order by way of exercising the revisional

jurisdiction. No substantial question of law or fact arises in this case.

11. The order dated 13.10.2022 passed by the Appellate

Authority, Hoshiarpur challenged in this revision petition is upheld.

Whereas finding no merit in the civil revision petition, the same stands

dismissed.

16.11.2022                                          (H.S.MADAAN)
Brij                                                    JUDGE

Whether reasoned/speaking :              Yes/No

Whether reportable               :       Yes/No




                                     4 of 4