Sunil Parshad Gaind vs Vishwa Mittar and Others

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—The Rent Controller, Amritsar, vide his order dated 24.7.2009, had ordered eviction of the

tenants/Respondents No. 1 and 2. Aggrieved against the same, the tenants filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, Amritsar. During the

pendency of the appeal, the tenants filed an application for stay of the execution proceedings. The Petitioner has filed reply to the said application

wherein the prayer was made that the tenants be also directed to deposit the mane profits. The Appellate Authority, Amritsar, vide his order dated

2.8.2010, held that the tenants are liable to pay Rs. 4,000 per month as mane profits. It will be pertinent to mention here that the tenants, before

their eviction was ordered, were paying the rent at the rate of Rs. 150 per month. The increase of rent from Rs. 150 to Rs. 4,000 per month as

mane profits is a discretion, validly exercised by the Appellate Authority, Amritsar.

Hence, no interference is warranted in the present revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed, in limine.

At this stage, learned Counsel for the Petitioner makes an alternative prayer that the property is very valuable and the tenants are unnecessarily

delaying culmination of the proceedings. Considering this alternative prayer, the Appellate Authority, Amritsar, is directed to decide the appeal

within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.