AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges

    Gaurishanker Mataprasad Mishra v. Mahatimsingh Sabhajit Singh

    K.K Tated, J.:— Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Today the matter is shown on board for fixing interim compensation payable by the applicant defendant in respect of the suit premises i.e residential room situated in Chawl having area admeasuring 80 sq.ft at Parel, Mumbai - 400 012.

    2. The learned counsel for the applicant defendant submits that toilet and bath room facility is not attached to the suit premises. He further submits that there is no water tap in the suit premises. The applicant has to take water from outside. He submits that during pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court, the appellate court directed the applicant tenant to deposit interim compensation @ Rs. 20/- pm. He submits that he has deposited the said amount in the Trial Court upto July 2013. He submits that in the same locality, rent is not more than Rs. 1200/- pm. In support of this contention, the counsel for the applicant relies on leave and license agreement dated 03.04.2014 in respect of room No. 2, Wakdi Chawl, Parel Village, Nana Paralkar Marg, Mumbai - 400012. In that leave and license agreement, the monthly compensation shown is Rs. 1200/- only. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondent landlord, in his Affidavit-in-Reply relied on leave and license agreement dated 23.11.2013 in respect of the flat No. 4/74, Sharma Safalya Building, Parvel Village, G.D Ambekar Road, Mumbai - 400012. Area of the said flat is shown 180 sq.ft In that leave and license agreement the license fees/compensation is of Rs. 14000/- pm. He submits that said leave and license agreement dated 23.11.2013 cannot be considered to decide interim compensation in respect of the suit premises. He submits that in the said leave and license agreement dated 23.11.2013 the flat is in a cooperative society. He submits that in the cooperative society, the society is providing all facilities to its members or occupants and same is not applicable in respect of the suit premises which is situated in a chawl. Hence, the claim made by the respondent landlord @ Rs. 10,000/- pm should not be considered and same be rejected. He submits that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to consider the location where the suit premises is situated, its rent and fix a reasonable compensation in respect of the suit premises till hearing and final disposal of the Civil Revision Application.

    3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that in Parel area the present market rate of rent for similarly situated premises will not be less than Rs. 10,000/-. In support of this contention, he relies on leave and license agreement dated 23.11.2013

    4. Heard both sides at length. Considering the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. v. Federal Motors (P) Ltd., (2005) 1 SCC 705 and The State of Maharashtra v. Super Max International Pvt. Ltd., (2009) 9 SCC 772, wherein, the Apex Court held that at the time of fixing interim compensation same be fixed on the basis of rent paid by the tenant, ready reckoner and market value of the suit premises, I have to decide monthly compensation to be deposited by the applicant during pendency of the Civil Revision Application in the present proceedings.

    5. In the present proceedings, the premises is situated in a chawl. The suit premises does not have any facility of toilet and bathroom and/or water tap. The area of suit premises is 80 sq.ft only. Considering the leave and license agreement dated 03.04.2014 in respect of room No. 2, Wakdi Chawl, Parel Village, Nana Paralkar Marg, Mumbai - 400 012, I am of the opinion that in the interest of justice the applicant to deposit sum of Rs. 2500/- pm in the Trial Court towards interim compensation. The applicant has to deposit interim compensation @ Rs. 2500/- pm from August 2013.

    6. Hence, following order is passed:

    a. The applicant tenant to deposit sum of Rs. 2500/- pm by way of compensation in the Trial Court on or before the 10th day of each calendar month.

    b. The applicant to deposit in trial court the arrears of compensation of Rs. 2500/- from August 2013 to April 2016 within 8 weeks from today.

    c. The applicant to deposit compensation @ Rs. 2500/- from May 2016 in the trial court till hearing and final disposal of the Civil Revision Application, on or before 10 day of each calendar month.

    d. If amount is deposited within stipulated time as stated hereinabove, the Trial Court is directed to invest the same in a fixed deposit account of any Nationalized Bank, initially for a period of one year and same shall be renewed from time to time till further orders.

    e. If there is any default on the part of the applicant to deposit arrears of compensation and/or further compensation, liberty granted to the respondent to move this court for appropriate orders.

    f. Interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) of the Civil Revision Application shall continue till hearing and final disposal of the Civil Revision Application.

    g. The applicant tenant is restrained by an order of injunction from creating any third party right, title and interest in respect of the suit premises till hearing and final disposal of the Civil Revision Application.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Gaurishanker Mataprasad Mishra v. Mahatimsingh Sabhajit Singh
    (Apr 13, 2016)