High CourtsSingle Bench

Maya Devi vs Raj Rani

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 23 December 1998 · Citation: (1999) 123 PLR 436 : (2000) 1 RCR(Civil) 386

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.H.B. Chalapathi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 20 Rule 12
CASE NUMBER
Regular Second Appeal No. 3641 of 1998
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 519 words

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.—The second appeal has been admitted only in respect of mesne profit by the admission order dated 3.12.1998.

2.

The plaintiff-respondent filed the suit for ejectment of the defendant from the suit property and recovery of rent due and mesne profits from the date of termination of the tenancy. Both the Courts below decreed the suit and awarded Rs. 400/- per month towards mesne profit with effect from 24.11.1992 the date of termination of the tenancy.

3.

The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the decree of the Courts below directing the payment of mesne profits with effect from 24.11.1992 at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month is not supported by any evidence. According to him, though the defendant stated that the rent agreed between the parties is at the rate of Rs. 75/- the Courts below found that the rent was Rs. 200/- per month and the mesne profits should have also been awarded at that rate.

4.

After going through the judgments of the Courts below and hearing the learned counsel for the respondent, I am of the opinion that the award of mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 400/- has not been based on any evidence. Under Order 20 Rule 12 in a suit for recovery of possession of immovable property and for mesne profits, the Court may pass a decree for mesne profits or direct an enquiry as to such mesne profits. Since the plaintiff made a claim for mesne profits for the period subsequent to the date of termination. I think it is proper to direct an enquiry as to the amount to be awarded as mesne profits. Since no evidence has been led in the suit by the plaintiff as to how much rent the premises would fetch from the date of termination of the tenancy. Admittedly, the rent of Rs. 200/- was fixed in the year 1984 and in view of the increase in the prices, there may be an increase in the rent also but the Court can not grant mesne profits arbitrarily without there being any evidence on record. In this view of the matter, the proper course would be to order an enquiry as to mesne profits payable by the defendant-appellant to the plaintiff from the date of termination of tenancy. Accordingly the decrees are hereby modified. The decree for possession of the suit property is confirmed and an enquiry as to mesne profits is directed to be held. The trial Judge on an application made by the plaintiff under Order 20 Rule 12 of the CPC may either hold an enquiry or appoint a Commissioner to conduct an enquiry as to how much amount is to be awarded towards mesne profits from the date of termination of tenancy. Till the date of delivery of possession the defendant is liable to pay the damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 200/- subject to determination of the mesne profits and the same will be adjusted towards the mesne profits as determined under Order 20 Rule 12. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.