Delhi High Court - Orders
Vasdev Brothers vs Estate Officer , Itdc Ltd & Anr on 8 January, 2019
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: Chief Justice, V. Kameswar Rao
$~48
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA 9/2019, CAV No. 7/2019 & CM No.299/2019 (Stay)
VASDEV BROTHERS ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Uttam Datt, Adv.
versus
ESTATE OFFICER , ITDC LTD & ANR ..... Respondents
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
ORDER
% 08.01.2019 CM No.300/2019 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.
CM No. 298/2019 (condonation of delay) This is an application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of 5 days' delay in filing the present appeal.
For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 5 days in filing the present appeal is condoned, the same is allowed.
Application stands disposed of.
LPA 9/2019 page 1 of 3 LPA 9/2019 Seeking exception to an order passed by the learned Writ Court in W.P.(C) 315/2012 dated 08.10.2018 dismissing a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging an order passed by the District Judge, New Delhi exercising his jurisdiction in an appeal under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, this appeal is filed.
In the matter of assessing damages for use of the property in question and awarding mesne profit for unauthorised use of the property, this appeal has been filed after the writ petition has been dismissed. Learned counsel by placing reliance on certain judgments of the Supreme Court particularly in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Nusli Neville Wadia (2008) 3 SCC 279 argued that until and unless the statutory authority or the owner of the property does not lead evidence to establish the quantum of damages, no damages can be awarded. However, learned Writ Court has considered the aforesaid judgment and it has found that the petitioner has occupied the premises beyond the period permitted in an unauthorised manner i.e. for more than 6 years and continued with the proceedings for about 9 years has granted the damages and mesne profits. The petitioner does not say as to what is wrong with the damages and mesne profits determined or how it is unsustainable.
The learned Writ Court found that the mesne profits assessed by the Estate Officer and upheld by the Additional District Judge was minimum of the rent that was received by the ITDC for similar accommodation i.e. at the rate of Rs.400/- per sq. ft. and in the absence of the petitioner challenging LPA 9/2019 page 2 of 3 the same by making any claim or pointing out as to how it is on the higher side, the learned Writ Court has refused to interfere into the matter. The concurrent order passed by the appellate authority and writ court are based on the due appreciation and facts and circumstances of the case and we see no reason to interfere with the matter. It is not the case of the appellant that the mesne profits should have been determined at a particular amount and it has been determined at a higher amount contrary to the provisions of law. That being so, once the determination of the mesne profits and damages has been done based on the minimum of the rent fixed for the area, we see no reason to make indulgence into the matter.
In view of the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. The caveat and pending application also stand disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
JANUARY 08, 2019/ns
LPA 9/2019 page 3 of 3