Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.
This is tenant's revision petition challenging the order dated 3.11.2011 of the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, whereby the mesne profits for the demised premises has been assessed at the rate of Rs. 1,15,000/- per month, from the date of eviction order till the decision of the appeal, and the petitioner has been directed to deposit the arrears of mesne profit within 30 days from the date of the said order.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that eviction of the petitioner has been ordered from the demised premises i.e entire ground floor of SCO No. 29 Sector 20-D, Chandigarh vide order dated 9.12.2010 of the Rent Controller. Petitioner has challenged the said order by filing an appeal. The said appeal is pending. During the pendency of this appeal, respondent landlord has filed an application for determination of mesne profits of the demised premises by submitting that the demised premises in question is commercial in nature and is located in the busy commercial center of the city and the rental value of the adjoining premises was quite high, so, mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 1,80,000/- per month be assessed.
The petitioner opposed the said application by filing reply. It was denied that the premises were located in the heart of the city. It was further stated that claim of Rs. 1,80,000/- per month was exorbitant. It was further stated that the lease deed specifically depicts that the tenancy period will be extended with an increase of 5% and thus the assessment of the mesne profits should be as per terms of the agreement relating to enhancement of rent.
It is a matter of record that the respondent-landlord placed before the Appellate Authority three registered lease deeds details of which are tabulated thus:
Sr. No.
Particulars of property
Date
Rent Agreed Portion Let out
Lease agreement Dated 25.5.10
Rent
Rs. 1,85,000/- PM
Ground Floor
1
SCO No. 38 Sector 20-C, Chandigarh
Lease Agreement Dated
25.5.2010
Rent
Rs. 78,000/- p.m Area 950 Sq.ft
2nd Floor
2
SCO
No. 28, Sector 20C-Chandigarh
Lease deed dated September 2008
Rent, 135,000/- PM Area 500 Sq.ft
Front Ground Floor
It may also be appreciated that petitioner-tenant also produced before the Appellate Court a registered lease deed dated 9.7.2010 detailed as under:-
Half share of ground floor SCO No. 20, Sector 20-D, Chandigarh
Lease Deed dated
9.7.2010
3
SCO No. 48 sector Chandigarh
Rent Rs. 50,000/- p.m
After considering the documents on record while passing the impugned order, the Appellate Authority observed as under:-
“In the case in hand, the tenanted premises is the ground floor of SCO No. 29, Sector 20-D, Chandigarh. The most relevant document for assessment of mesne profit would therefore be the lease deeds at Sr. No. 1 dated 25.5.2010 and Sr. No. 3 September 2009. Both relate to ground floors of SCOs situated in Sector 20-C. By virtue of the lease deed dated 9.7.2010 placed on record by the tenants, half share of ground floor of SCO No. 20, Sector 20-D, Chandigarh was let out on monthly rent of Rs. 50,000/- per month. Considering the lease deeds produced by the tenant and those produced by the landlords relating to SCO No. 38 and SCO No. 49 in Sector 20-C, Chandigarh, the market rent of the ground floor portion in occupation of the tenants can reasonably be assessed to the tune of Rs. 1,15,000/- per month. The mesne profit of the tenanted premises is quantified at Rs. 1,15,000/- w.e.f the date of eviction order till the decision of appeal.
Aggrieved from the aforesaid order, petitioner has filed the instant revision petition and has prayed for quashing of the impugned order.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order and the averments made in this revision petition and the documents produced on record.
It is not in dispute that petitioner is liable to pay mesne profits or compensation for use and occupation of the premises with effect from the date of order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller. The Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Super Max International Private Limited 2009 (2) RCR 246 (SC) has observed that with effect from the date of passing of decree of eviction, the tenant is liable to pay mesne profits or compensation for use and occupation of premises at the rate at which the landlord would have been able to let out the premises and earn rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises. On behalf of the petitioner it could not be disputed that vide registered lease deed 25.5.2010 SCO No. 38 Sector 20-C, having equal area has been rented out for Rs. 1,85,000/- per month and even second floor of SCO No. 28 Sector 20-C, Chandigarh has been rented out for a sum of Rs. 78,000/- per month. Even the lease deed dated 9.7.2010 relied upon by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority shows rental at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per month for half of ground floor of SCO No. 20, Sector 20-D, Chandigarh. Counsel for the petitioner before this Court has relied upon Annexure P4 a purported lease deed executed on 1.4.2011 for first floor of SCO No. 31 Sector 20-D Chandigarh at a monthly rent of Rs. 27,000/-. However, a perusal of the said document would show that the word “part” has been scored of after making a photostat copy of the document. Counsel for the petitioner was unable to show the certified copy/original of the said document. Even the said lease deed is not a registered document. Faced with this situation, counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the reliance upon the lease deed pertaining to Sector 20-C which is a market of computer technology equipment cannot be relied upon for determination of mesne profit/market rent of a show room situated in Sector 20-D, Chandigarh wherein cloth market is situated.
Again, the argument raised is without any merit. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner could not dispute before this Court that the shops in Sector 20-C and Sector 20-D are in one continuous lane except one dividing road between Sector 20-C and 20-D. Even in Sector 20-D Chandigarh, numerous shops are situated who are dealing with Computer and Technology Equipment etc. Even otherwise, it may be seen that the petitioner has failed to rebut the document produced by the respondent landlord before the Appellate Authority for determination of mesne profits. In this view of the matter, I find no merit in this revision petition and the same is dismissed.