M/s. Ahuja Sons vs Sudha Sood

Rajesh Bindal, J

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 1.5.2013 passed by the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restrictions Act, 1949, whereby on an application filed by the landlord a sum of Rs. 5,000/- has been fixed as mesne profits during the pendency of the appeal filed by the petitioner-tenant challenging the order of eviction passed against him. The property in dispute is situated in Civil Lines, Ludhiana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that mesne profits fixed by the learned court below are on higher side. There is no evidence led by the landlord. While referring to an order dated 4.12.2012 passed in Civil Revision No. 4140 of 2012 Rameshwar Nath vs. Sudha Sood, it was submitted that for an identical shop rented out by the landlord, this court had fixed the mesne profits at Rs. 3,700/- per month.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned. The mere fact that the shop is located in Civil Lines, Ludhiana, which is a prime area in the City, is sufficient for fixing mesne profits @ Rs. 5,000/- per month. The same cannot be said to be on higher side. Some time the estimated mesne profits had to be assessed. Earlier order passed by this court in Rameshwar Nath''s case (supra), also cannot be relied upon for the reason that in the aforesaid case this court had not decided the issue, rather the parties conceded for the same.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I do no find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is dismissed.