Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

25. Mesne profits have been claimed for the preceding three years i.e. from 01.03.1998 to 28.2.2001, however entitlement of the plaintiff company is three years prior to the filing of the suit which would be from 11.3.1998 to 12.03.2001.

26. Property had been vacated on 28.09.2001. On record, it has been proved that the adjoining property i.e. 50% of the share which is co-owned by Man Mohan Singh had been decreed for mesne profits/damages @ Rs.60/- per sq.feet per month w.e.f. 20.11.1997 up to 30.9.2001. Order of District Judge dated 29.4.2000 on the application under Order 20 Rule 12 of the CPC in the said suit is on record. In the present case there is a further positive evidence to substantiate the averment of the plaintiff that rent of the same property i.e. for the mezzanine floor in the same building was @ Rs.39/- per sq. feet per month from the October 1996 up to September 1999 and thereafter at Rs.51/- per sq. feet per month from October 1999 to September 2002. These are the relevant periods for which the plaintiff is entitled to make his claim. Admittedly, this rate of rent is for the mezzanine floor. Judicial notice is taken of the fact that the rent of the basement will be lower in comparison to the rent being paid for the mezzanine floor. A pro rata decrease in the rental of the mezzanine floor qua the basement has been tabulated in a chart and finds mention in para no.27 of the evidence by way of affidavit of PW-1. The rate of Rs.39/- for the mezzanine floor would pro rata decrease to Rs.32.90 for the period 1.10.996 to 30.9.1999 and for the period 1.10.1999 to 30.9.2002 corresponding rate of Rs.51/- would be decreased to Rs.42.80/- for the basement. This pro rata reduction has not been challenged in the cross-examination of PW-1. The rental of the basement would by and large be 1/3rd less than the rental of the mezzanine floor. This calculation is accepted.