TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 2079
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, therefore, the aforesaid condition imposed by the appellate Court needs to be modified. 3. The respondent has been a tenant in shop block nos. 3 and 4 of the ground floor in a building known as Gopal Krishna Bhavan, Jhasi Rani Square, Sitabuldi, Wardha Road, Nagpur for the past more than 40 years. It is the contention of the petitioners that in addition to the said two shop blocks admeasuring about 444 sq.ft. each, area in mezzanine floor is also occupied by the respondent. The rent being paid for the said premises by the respondent was about Rs.460/- per month for each shop block. The petitioners had filed suit for eviction and possession against the respondent under the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, inter alia, on the ground of bona fide need. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners on 22.03.2018, whereby the respondent was directed to vacate the suit premises within a period of 30 days from the date of the decree. 4.. Aggrieved by the said decree, the respondent filed Regular Civil Appeal No. 303 of 2018, before the appellate Court and also filed an application for stay of the decree during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioners o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd, Mr. R.R. Prajapati, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellate Court had imposed a reasonable condition by asking the respondent to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month during the pendency of the appeal as occupation charges. It was submitted that the building in which the suit shop blocks are situated, is more than at least 50 years old and that the nature of business carried out by the respondent is such that the income of the respondent is not enough to be able to pay the occupation charges demanded by the petitioners. It is submitted that the quantum of occupation charges in a situation like that which arises in the present case, cannot be said to be unreasonably low and that if the Court imposes condition that the respondent is unable to satisfy, it would take away the right of the respondent to maintain its appeal before the appellate Court. It was also submitted that direction be given to the appellate Court for expediting the hearing of the appeal so that the validity or otherwise of the decree passed by the trial Court would be decided on merits and during such period, the respondent would continue to pay the amount towards the occupation charges....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aced reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Niyas Ahmad Khan .vs. Mahmood Rahmat Ullah Khan (supra) to contend that the appellate Court in the present case had fixed a reasonable figure towards occupation charges. It was contended that when the appellate Court imposes condition while determining the quantum of occupation charges, it cannot adopt an arbitrary figure and that the condition cannot be unreasonable or oppressive. The said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent is clearly distinguishable because in that case the landlord had failed in both the Courts below and it was the writ petition of the landlord which was being considered by the High Court and in such a situation, the question that the High Court considered was as to whether the tenant could be asked to pay a higher figure towards occupation charges or rent during the pendency of the writ petition before the High Court. In the said case, since the Courts below had not granted the eviction decree, the relationship of landlord and tenant continued and, therefore, the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case pertai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that while arriving at the figure of Rs.10,000/- as occupation charges, the appellate Court has not discussed the material placed on record on behalf of the petitioners and it appears that the amount of Rs.10,000/- per month has been fixed without any basis by the appellate Court. 14. In this situation, there is no alternative for this Court but to analyse the material on record in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court in earlier judgments, to arrive at a reasonable figure towards the occupation charges, as a condition for grant of stay of the eviction decree. 15. On behalf of the petitioners, reliance has been placed on the ready reckoner, which shows the rate of Rs.1,49,400/- per square meter as the market value of properties in the area where the suit shop blocks are located. There is no dispute about the fact that the shops are located on the main road. A perusal of the lease deeds placed on record, particularly the lease deed pertaining to the premises in the very same building of the year 2017, shows that the property was leased out for an amount of about Rs.86,580/- per month. In this regard, it is submitted on behalf of the respondent tha....