-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.6903 OF 2007 National Textile Corporation & Anr. : Petitioners V/s. Shri Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.Y.S.Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Manoj Dalvi and Mr.S.V.Masurkar for the petitioners. Mr.R.A.Dada, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Birendra Saraf, Mr.Ameet Hariani, Ms Heena Chheda and Shana Dias i/b. M/s.Hariani & Co., for the respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.7110 OF 2007 Shri Narendra Badrikumar Jagad & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. National Textile Corporation & Anr. : Respondents ... Mr.R.A.Dada, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Birendra Saraf, Mr.Ameet Hariani, Ms Heena Chheda and Shana Dias i/b. M/s.Hariani & Co., for the petitioners. Mr.Y.S.Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Manoj Dalvi and Mr.S.V.Masurkar for the respondents. ... CORAM : S.A.BOBDE, J. DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2007. P.C. 1. The first Writ Petition, being Writ Petition no.6903 of 2007 is filed by National Textile Corporation, a -: 2 :- tenant, who has been ordered to be evicted and in whose appeal, the learned appellate Bench has directed payment of compensation of Rs.4 lakhs per month for use and occupation of the suit premises till the disposal of the appeal. According to the petitioners-National Textile Corporation, the amount ought to be less. The second Writ Petition, being Writ Petition no.7110 of 2007, is in respect of the same order whereby the landlords Narandra Badrikumar Jagad and others claim that the amount of compensation directed to be deposited ought to be enhanced. 2. The suit premises are 12,118 sq. yards equivalent to 10,131.85 sq. mtrs., bearing plot no.9, C.S. no.73 of Lower Parel Division, situate at Delisle Road, now known as N.M.Joshi Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai, on which the petitioners-National Textile Corporation are running a mill. The lease was originally in favour of Poddar Mills Ltd., which was nationalised. 3. Admittedly, the original lease rent is Rs.128.75 per month. 4. The petitioners-National Textile Corporation appealed against the eviction. The appellate Bench, having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court in Anderson Wright -: 3 :- and Co. v. Amar Nath Roy and others (AIR 2003 SC 2457), considered it appropriate to impose as a condition for stay that the petitioners-National Textile Corporation would pay Rs.4,00,000/- per month from the date of the decree i.e. 5.8.2006 till 4.7.2007 and further amount of Rs.4,00,000/- per month till the disposal of the appeal. 5. Mr.Jahagirdar, the learned counsel for the petitioners-National Textile Corporation, submitted that the amount is excessive. The petitioners have, however, not been able to demonstrate any standards on the basis of which the amount awarded by the appellate Bench can be said to be excessive. The area in the petitioners’ possession, in spite of the decree, is a large area and the learned appellate Bench has imposed only Rs.4/- per sq. foot. Having regard to the fact that the suit premises are in prime commercial area of Mumbai, the amount cannot be considered to be excessive. Indeed, the Supreme Court has clearly observed in an earlier case in Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. v. Federal Motors (P) Ltd. [(2005) 1 SCC 705] that while determining the quantum of the amount so receivable by the landlord, the landlord is not bound by the contractual rate of rent which was prevalent prior to the date of the decree. There is also no merit in the submission that because the industry is being subject to financial reconstruction by the B.I.F.R., -: 4 :- the value of the property ought to have been considered low and, therefore, the amount ought to be reduced. In fact, it is for the B.I.F.R. to consider the liability of compensation now imposed by the appellate Bench if and when occasion demands for the purpose of reconstruction. 6. Mr.Dada, the learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition no.7110 of 2007 submitted that the amount imposed by way of condition is inadequate and the appellate Bench ought not to have lightly brushed aside the Architects’ report dated 6.11.2006 and 2.2.2007. The Architects have pointed out that the landlords are entitled to mesne profits at the rate of Rs.27,50,000/- from February 2007 onwards. The appellate Bench has rightly not acted on the reports since the reports have not yet been proved in the inquiry for mesne profits which is pending. The Court hearing the issue of mesne profits would certainly take into account the report and any other evidence produced by the landlord and the tenants. By itself, the appellate Bench cannot be said to have committed any error in not acting on the reports. There is no merit in the submission on behalf of the landlord in this case. 7. In the circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the order imposing conditions which is impugned by -: 5 :- both the sides. There is no error apparent on the face of the order and the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed. It is, however, made clear that the impugned order shall not influence or affect the decision on the claims for mesne profits which shall be decided on its own merits. The hearing of Appeal no.627 of 2006 before the Addl. Chief Justice, Court of Small Causes, Mumbai, is hereby expedited. The inquiry into mesne profits is also expedited. The appeal shall be decided not later than end of July, 2008 and the inquiry into mesne profits shall also be expedited. Time to deposit arrears is extended upto the end of December, 2007. S.A. BOBDE, J.