Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


SURJEET SINGH v ADDI DISTRICT &SESSION JUDGE & - CW Case No. 6346 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 4139 (22 August 2007)


Surjeet Singh


Addl.District and Sessions Judge and ors.

Date of Order : 22/8/2007.


Shri Ravi Chirania for the petitioner.


Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner has challenged the impugned-order dated 31/5/2007 whereby in his appeal filed against the decree of ejectment, the learned First Appellate Court has fixed Rs.2000/- as mesne-profit payable to the landlord.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that no evidence is available on record so as to arrive at the conclusion that as per prevalent market rate, Rs.2000/- per month could be rent for the shop in question. The learned First

Appellate Court had no justification in assuming this to be the prevalent market rate. It was argued that the order passed by the learned First

Appellate Court suffers from non-application of mind inasmuch as, unsustainable in law.

SBCWP NO.6346/2007.


Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material on record, I find that the learned First Appellate Court has taken into consideration the fact that rented premises were let out to the petitioner 30 years ago and that it was being used for commercial purposes. Learned First appellate Court has safeguarded interest of the petitioner by directing that if appeal is eventually decided in favour of the petitioner, the amount so deposited shall be liable to be adjusted accordingly. While passing the impugned-order, the learned First appellate Court has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Court in Atma Ram Properties (Pvt.)

Ltd. Vs. M/s.Federal Motor Pvt.Ltd. : 2005(1)

W.L.C. (SC) Civil 340 wherein it was held by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court that once decree of ejectment is passed, relationship of tenant and landlord stands snapped and appropriate order for fixation of mesne-profit in accordance with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 5 CPC can be passed by the appellate court.

SBCWP NO.6346/2007.


In the facts of the case, I do not find that the impugned-order suffers from any error apparent on the face of record so as to justify interference of this court.

Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed in limine.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.