1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3159 of 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2764 of 1999 Dr.Brijendra J. Jain & Anr. .. Applicants versus Annia Carvalho (decd) By Lrs .. Respondent John Carvalho & Ors. ... Mr.P.S. Dani for the applicants. Mr.Y.K. Sharma with Mr. Joseph for respondent nos. 1ca to 1cd. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 29th August 2008 P.C.: 1. This application is filed by the landlord on the basis of exposition of the Apex Court that even 2 if the superior court was to admit the proceedings challenging the decree of eviction passed against the tenants, the superior court is entitled to fix appropriate fair market compensation to be paid by the tenant during the pendency of the proceedings. 2. According to the applicant, the fair market rate in respect of the suit premises is not less than Rs.56/- per sq.ft. per month. No documentary evidence or contemporaneous record to substantiate this claim has been placed on record. This assertion is made by applicant-landlord on the basis of same opinion expressed by the local property dealer. That cannot be the basis to accept the amount specified by the applicant without any further information made available by the applicant towards the prevailing market price. The property dealer cannot be said to be expert so as to give valuation of the property and indicate the prevailing fair market rent in that regard. 3. The controversy, however, can be straight away answered on the basis of stand taken by the writ petitioner- respondents in this application. According to them, the fair market price in respect of the suit premises shall not exceed Rs.20,000/-. This fact is mentioned in the affidavit of the writ 3 petitioner in paragraph no.12. In other words, the writ petitioners have accepted the position of the prevailing market rent in respect of the suit premises, cannot be anything less than Rs.20,000/- per month. Besides, it is not the case of the writ petitioners that they would not be in a position to pay such compensation. I will accept that figure and proceed to pass order on the present application in the following terms. 4. This application is partly allowed. The writ petitioner to avail of interim relief granted by this court in Writ Petition no.2764 of 1999 shall pay sum of Rs.20,000/- per month to the applicants on or before 7th of every English Calendar month even in case of any two default committed by the writ petitioner in payment of monthly compensation, the interim relief granted by this court on 15th June 1999 shall stand vacated forthwith without further reference to the court. 5. It is made clear that payment to be made by the writ petitioner in terms of this order shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. 6. Counsel for the applicants-respondents in 4 writ petition on instructions states that the writ petitioner shall make payment by cheque drawn in favour of respondent no.1b and personally hand over the same on his address stated in the petition. Application is disposed off accordingly. 7. In the event the writ petitioner succeeds, the respondents in writ petition shall be obliged to reimburse the entire amount received by them in terms of this order along with interest thereon at 10% p.a. till the amount is repaid to the respondent. 8. The liability of the writ petitioner to pay the amount in terms of this order shall commence from November 2007 as the present application has been filed on 23rd October 2007. The arrears of compensation amount shall be paid by the writ petitioner within eight weeks from today failing which the writ petition shall stand dismissed for non prosecution without further reference to the court. 9. Application disposed off on the above terms. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)