AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.P. Nagrath, J.
The petitioner has filed the instant revision seeking to modify the order dated 22.09.2014 of the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, fixing mesne profits @ Rs. 8000/- per month during pendency of the appeal filed by the respondent against the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller. The prayer is made to increase the mesne profit to Rs. 1,00,000/- per month. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned order and the paper-book.
The premises was rented out to respondent No. 1 initially @ Rs. 1050/- per month about 14 years ago.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that area of the shop in question is 15'' x 28.3'' and situated in a prime location of the commercial town of Amritsar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to cross-examination of Jaswinder Singh RW-1 (Annexure P-1), a witness of the respondent. The witness stated that in the year 2007 the turn-over of the shop was Rs. 75,000/- for the first month and at present it is Rs. 4 to Rs. 5 lacs per month. The minimum sale is about Rs. 2 lacs per month. RW-1 further stated that the department had raised the demand of Rs. 25 lacs for vacation of the premises in the year 2006. So, keeping these facts into consideration learned counsel submitted that fixation of Rs. 8,000/- per month as mesne profits is quite on the lower side.
I am unable to agree with the learned counsel as the sale proceeds to the tune of Rs. 3 to Rs. 4 lacs may earn profit to the tune of Rs. 40,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- per month, if so, determined @ 15% of the turn-over. There are various expenses involved in running of the shop by the department. The expenditure would include the cost of goods stocked in the premises, salary of the employees etc. No recent lease deed of any of the adjoining shops was brought on record for the Appellate Authority to come to a different conclusion.
It may be seen that even by adding 10% per annum increase of the base rent of Rs. 1050/- per month as existing 14 years ago, fixation of the amount of Rs. 8000/- towards mesne profits would be quite justified. The principle laid down by Hon''ble Supreme Court in Sadhu Ram Vs. Parminder Singh, on the subject was also noticed by the learned Appellate Authority. I thus find that the view of learned Appellate Authority while fixing mesne profits is not perverse calling for interference of this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.
Dismissed.