CR No.1401 of 2006 ::1:: & CR No.1402 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 16.03.2010 (i) CR No.1401 of 2006 Smt. Ishwar Rani .. Petitioner Versus Sonu alias Sunil and others .. Respondents (ii) CR No.1402 of 2006 Om Parkash .. Petitioner Versus Sonu alias Sunil and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI a). Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? b). To be referred to the Reporters or not ? c). Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present:- Mr.I.K.Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr.M.S.Kohli, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.V.K.Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr.Parshant Vashisht, Advocate for the respondents . . . AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) These revisions have been filed against the order of the learned Executing Court determining the mesne profits @ Rs.17,000/- as monthly mesne profits for the property covered by Civil Revision No.1401 of 2006 and Rs.13,000/- for the property covered in Civil Revision No.1402 of 2006. It may be noticed that these mesne profits were determined as a consequence to the order passed in RSA Nos.5503 and CR No.1401 of 2006 ::2:: & CR No.1402 of 2006 5504 of 2003. The learned Executing Court has primarily relied upon two factors i.e. (i) the property is now commercial in nature and (ii) the report of the registered Architect-cum-Valuer, wherein this was rented premises as opined by him. During the initial stages of the arguments, there was a dispute regarding the user to which the property was put . Consequently, by an agreement between the learned counsel, Local Commissioner was appointed. He has given his report, which has been perused. Both the parties have accepted the factual correctness of this report since no objection has been filed thereto. As per this repot, apart from a residential house, there are seven shops and a covered court-yard, which is being used as a work-shop. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that even though the existence of these premises is not disputed yet in view of the pending litigation, there are no tenants in some of the premises and therefore, the total mesne profits do not exceed Rs.7000/- to Rs.8000/-. Learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondents has however argued that as per the report also the property is situated in commercial area and not only are the petitioners enjoying the usufruct of the house, they are also enjoying the rental income. He has offered that in case, the petitioners handover the possession to the respondents, he would deposit Rs.40,000/- p.m. as mesne profits. Keeping in view the report of the Local Commissioner and the fact that the property is situated on a commercial road, in my opinion, it would be appropriate if mesne profits are fixed at Rs.20,000/- i.e. Rs.11,000/- p.m. for the property involved in Civil Revision No.1401 of 2006 and Rs.9,000/- p.m. for the property involved in Civil Revision CR No.1401 of 2006 ::3:: & CR No.1402 of 2006 No.1402 of 2006. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners prays for some time to make the necessary deposit after setting off the amount already deposited by the petitioners. It would be in the interest of justice if 3 months' time is granted to the petitioners to deposit the arrears of mesne profits from the date of decree of the learned Trial Court. The learned Executing Court is further directed to create a Fixed/Recurring Deposit for the amount of the mesne profits, which would abide the final decision of this Court. In the circumstances, these petitions stand disposed of. Since the main petitions are disposed of, the Civil Miscellaneous Application, if any, shall also stand disposed of. March 16, 2010 (AJAY TEWARI) Sukhpreet JUDGE