Construction-cost adjustment, tenancy termination, and mesne profits were resolved on pleadings, acknowledgments, and proof.

An appellate court may consider the effect of an interlocutory amendment on the final decree where it affects the merits, and contemporaneous documents can prevail over a later inconsistent pleading on construction-cost adjustment. The tenancy dispute turned on pleaded and proved facts: the termination notice was upheld, the civil court's jurisdiction objection was rejected for want of clear pleadings and proof, and the eviction claim was treated as maintainable. The tenant's right to recover construction cost was supported by receipts and acknowledgments, but the claimed interest was moderated. Arrears of rent were sustained, the deposit was refundable, and mesne profits were restricted to amounts proved on evidence.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the amendment of the plaint and the plea of adjustment of construction cost in rent could be relied upon in appeal; (ii) whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the eviction claim and whether the tenancy was validly terminated; (iii) whether the tenant was entitled to recover the construction cost with interest; and (iv) what was the proper rate of arrears, refund and mesne profits.

Issue (i): whether the amendment of the plaint and the plea of adjustment of construction cost in rent could be relied upon in appeal.

Analysis: An interlocutory order allowing amendment does not attain finality on the merits of the dispute and can be examined in appeal from the final decree when it affects the decision of the case. The pleadings and the documentary record showed that the original stand of the landlord and the contemporaneous documents acknowledged construction by the tenant, adjustment of construction cost against rent, and a settled liability. The later attempt to resile from that position was held to be unsupported by the evidence.

Conclusion: The amended plea was not accepted against the tenant, and the finding on liability for construction cost stood against the landlord.

Issue (ii): whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the eviction claim and whether the tenancy was validly terminated.

Analysis: The tenancy was terminated by notice under the governing law, and the objection to jurisdiction based on alleged apportionment of rent and ownership of the first floor portion was not pleaded with sufficient clarity. A party cannot successfully raise a new jurisdictional factual basis at the appellate stage without proper pleadings and proof. On the materials, the landlord-tenant relationship and the validity of the termination notice were upheld.

Conclusion: The eviction claim was maintainable and the tenancy was validly terminated.

Issue (iii): whether the tenant was entitled to recover the construction cost with interest.

Analysis: The evidence, including receipts, confirmations, and the running account, established that the tenant had advanced construction and that the landlord acknowledged the amount due. The contractual interest claimed at 36% per annum was considered excessive in the circumstances, and a lower rate was found more appropriate.

Conclusion: The tenant was entitled to recover the construction amount, with interest awarded at a moderated rate.

Issue (iv): what was the proper rate of arrears, refund and mesne profits.

Analysis: The tenant was held liable for arrears of rent where payment was not proved. The deposit amount was directed to be refunded. As to mesne profits, the court accepted only the extent supported by the evidence and fixed staged rates for the post-termination occupation, rejecting the higher claim for want of adequate proof.

Conclusion: Arrears of rent were confirmed, the deposit was refundable, and mesne profits were restricted to the rates determined by the court.

Final Conclusion: The decision substantially upheld the landlord's monetary claims while denying eviction relief, and it modified the interest and mesne profits to the extent found justified on the evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate court may examine the effect of an interlocutory amendment on the final decree, and proved admissions and contemporaneous documents can override a later inconsistent pleading; contractual claims must still be supported by evidence, and excessive interest or unproven mesne profits may be reduced to a reasonable amount.

---