Himani Walia vs. Ankit Katyal & Anr.

Held

The Court held that the plaintiff is entitled to arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 5,75,000/- per month for the period November 2017 to May 25, 2018, and at the rate of Rs. 6,61,250/- per month for the period May 26, 2018, to June 30, 2019, as per the lease deed. Regarding mesne profits, the Court held it would be fair and equitable to grant mesne profits/damages for unauthorized use and occupation from July 1, 2019, to December 10, 2019, at the rate of Rs. 6,61,250/- per month, which was the agreed rate of rent for that period. For electricity charges, the Court allowed only the sum of Rs. 7,31,350/- as shown in the electricity bill placed on record, as there was no further evidence regarding the present status or final charges paid for restoration. The plaintiff was also held entitled to costs for the suit.

Facts

The plaintiff, Himani Walia, filed a suit for recovery of possession of property, arrears of rent, mesne profits, and electricity charges against the defendants, Ankit Katyal & Anr. The property was leased to the defendants for running a restaurant. The plaintiff's father, the original lessor, passed away, and the property devolved upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had not paid rent since October 2017, had closed their business, and the premises were vacant. A legal notice was sent to terminate the lease, but it was returned with a "left without address" remark. The defendants failed to appear, were set ex-parte, and their right to file a written statement was closed. Possession of the premises was handed back to the plaintiff via court. The suit proceeded to decide the remaining prayers for arrears of rent, mesne profits, and electricity charges.

Key Issues

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover arrears of rent for the period from November 2017 to June 30, 2019, and if so, at what rate, as per the lease deed (turning on Clause 1 of the Lease Deed)? 2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits/damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the subject premises from July 1, 2019, to December 10, 2019, and if so, at what rate (turning on Clause 13 of the Lease Deed and Order XX Rule 12 of the CPC)? 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover arrears of electricity charges, late payment charges, and penalty as stipulated in the lease deed (turning on Clause 5 of the Lease Deed)? Petitioner's arguments: The plaintiff argued that the defendants failed to pay rent as per the lease deed and were in unauthorized occupation. The lease deed was duly proved and its terms were enforceable. The plaintiff sought recovery of rent at the agreed rates, mesne profits at the agreed rate of rent plus GST and TDS, and penalty as per the lease deed. The plaintiff also claimed electricity charges based on the last bill and averments in the affidavit. Revenue/State's arguments: No arguments were recorded for the revenue or state as this was a civil suit between private parties.