1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. JUDGMENT Kishan Lal Vs. Vijendra Kumar Chaudhary & Anr. (S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.11273/2010) S. B. Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. Date of Judgment: August 13, 2010 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.S. CHAUHAN Mr.Veyankatesh Garg, for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: Aggrieved by the order dated 28.07.2010, passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.1, District & Sessions Court, Ajmer, the petitioner has challenged the same before this Court. Vide order dated 28.07.2010, while allowing the application under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC, the learned Judge has directed the petitioner to pay Rs.4,000/- per month as masne profit to the respondent No.1 and has also directed to deposit an amount of Rs.1,44,000/- within a period of one month. Mr. Veyankatesh Garg, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that the said order dated 28.07.2010 has been passed without recording any evidence on behalf of the petitioner. Secondly, the amount of Rs.4,000/- per 2 month has been calculated without any evidentiary basis. Lastly, the period for depositing Rs.1,44,000/- is too short a time. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. A bare perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that the learned Judge has considered the DLC rate of the market rental value. According to the learned Judge, the market rental value was Rs.15,000/- per month. However, he has still directed that only Rs.4,000/- be paid per month as masne profit. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned counsel that the said amount of Rs.4,000/- has been calculated without any evidentiary basis is without any basis. A bare perusal of the impugned order also reveals that the learned Judge has imposed reasonable condition upon the petitioner while granting a stay in his favour. However, the condition that the petitioner should deposit an amount of Rs.1,44,000/- within a period of one month is unreasonable. Therefore, this Court extends the period for depositing the said amount to four months from the date of this judgment. With these observations, this petition is partly allowed. (R.S. CHAUHAN) J. Manoj solanki