Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
109/2012 on 7 May, 2013
Author: Tapan Kumar Dutt
Bench: Tapan Kumar Dutt
1
2013
S.A. 109 of 2012
Mr. S. P. Roy Chowdhury,
Mr. A.K. Bhattacharya,
Mr. Biswarup Biswas
... for the Petitioner
Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee,
Mr. Surya Prasad Chattopadhyay
... for the Opposite Party
Re : C.A.N. 1455 of 2012
Yesterday similar application being C.A.N. 1456 of 2012 in connection with
S.A. 111 of 2012 was disposed of.
The learned Advocates for the respective parties submit that the facts of
the aforesaid application and the facts of the present application are similar
excepting that the area of the suit premises and the contractual rate of rent that
prevailed between the parties are different and the suit premises in the
yesterday's application was on the ground floor of the premises No. 79/29,
Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Road, Kolkata and the suit premises of today's
application is on the first floor of the same premises. The said learned Advocates
further submit that the respondents in both the appeals are the same but the
appellants in the two appeals are different.
The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent however further adds that the person interested who is acting in the interest of the appellants in the two appeals is the same.
Be that as it may, it appears that the suit premises in connection with the present appeal i.e. S.A. 109 of 2012 comprises of an area of 1,000 sq. ft. on the 2 first floor of the aforesaid premises and the contractual rate of rent that prevailed between the parties was Rs. 750/- per month.
This Court has discussed the arguments made by the respective parties while disposing of the aforesaid application being C.A.N. 1456 of 2012 and this Court disposes of the present application in the following manner :
The interim order of stay of all further proceedings in Ejectment Execution Case No. 180 of 2011 pending before the learned Judge, Fifth Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court, Calcutta during the pendency of the application for stay, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench on 28.6.2012, is extended till the disposal of the appeal or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
The learned Advocates for the respective parties submit today that they adopt the same arguments which they had made yesterday in connection with the other application, this Court only needs to take note of the difference in the area of the suit premises and the contractual rate of rent that prevailed at the material time.
This Court has by the aforesaid order dated 6.5.2013 come to the conclusion that the present occupation charges in respect of the said premises can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 40/- per sq. ft. per month taking into consideration the prevailing market rate of rent that may be applicable to the said premises. On similar grounds the present application is disposed of on the following conditions :3
1. The appellant-petitioner shall put in the decretal costs, if any, within 30th June, 2013 before the learned Executing Court concerned;
2. The appellant-petitioner shall deposit the arrear occupation charges of Rs. 8,00,000/- for the period September, 2011 upto April, 2013 by ten equal monthly installments before the aforesaid Executing Court concerned and first of such installments shall be deposited by the appellant-petitioner within 31st May, 2013 and thereafter the appellant-petitioner shall go on depositing the monthly installments month by month by the end of each month till the entire arrears are liquidated;
3. The appellant-petitioner shall go on depositing the current monthly occupation charges before the aforesaid learned Executing Court concerned at the rate of Rs. 40/- per sq. ft. per month with effect from the month of May, 2013 by the end of month for which it becomes due. First of such current deposits is to be made by the appellant-petitioner by 31st May, 2013 for the month of May, 2013. The appellant-petitioner shall thereafter go on depositing the current occupation charges month by month by the end of each month for which it becomes due.
4. The appellant-petitioner shall prepare the requisite number of paper books out of Court and file the same in the department 4 concerned within four weeks from the date of receipt of notice of arrival of the lower court records.
In default of compliance of any of the conditions mentioned above on the part of the appellant-petitioner, the interim order shall stand vacated automatically and the plaintiff-respondent shall be entitled to proceed with the Title Execution Case concerned.
As prayed for by the learned Advocate for the appellant-petitioner, let the lower court records be brought to this Court by special messenger at the cost of the appellant-petitioner and if such special messenger cost is put in by ten days, let the lower court records be brought to this Court by special messenger.
Since the sole respondent in the appeal is being represented by his learned Advocate, further service of notice of appeal upon the sole respondent is dispensed with. The appeal is treated as ready as regards service.
As prayed for by the learned Advocates for the respective parties, let the two appeals being S.A. 109 of 2012 and S.A. 111 of 2012, after those are made for hearing, be included in the list for hearing one after the other.
The application stands disposed of.
Urgent certified xerox copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.
( Tapan Kumar Dutt, J. ) AKD