: 1 : FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.665 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s orders of Coram, appearances, Court’s . orders or directions and . Registrar’s orders . -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.P.K. Dhakepdhalkar, Senior Counsel i/b M/s.Intralegal for the Petitioner. Mr.P.S. Dani for the Respondent. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 4TH DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. : 1. Admit and heard finally. 2. I am not inclined to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below fixing the mesne-profits. 3. A decree for eviction has been executed. The only question was of mesne-profits. The premises involved admeasure 2000 sq.ft. located in the heart of the commercial sector of this city namely Fort. It is important to note at the out-set that the Petitioner/tenant did not lead any evidence. The Petitioner did not even produce the valuation report. : 2 : The Petitioner did not even suggest what the correct valuation ought to be. 4. On the other hand, the Respondent examined the valuer. His valuation report was tendered in evidence. The valuer has considered three instances in the surrounding area and taken the mean thereof at Rs.58/- per sq.ft. Thus a sum of Rs.1,16,000/- per month has been fixed by the valuer. Both the Courts below have accepted the valuation. I agree. 5. It is submitted that the valuer had not tendered the extract from the Sub-Registrar’s office to establish the rates which the valuer himself had seen. Had there been some contrary evidence, this aspect may have been of some assistance to the Petitioner. It appears that the Petitioner did not adduce any evidence and did not even suggest any contrary rate knowing full well that the rate suggested is more than reasonable considering the area as well as the location. : 3 : 6. In the circumstances, the Civil Revision Application is dismissed.