dgm gm gm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.1767 OF 2008 PETITION NO.1767 OF 2008 PETITION NO.1767 OF 2008 Employees State Insurance Corporation Petitioners Vs. 1. Shri Jivraj Premji Patel & ors. Respondents Mr.A.J.Jadhav for the Petitioners. Mrs.Divya R. Trivedi for Respondents 1 to 6. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 6th January, 2009. : 6th January, 2009. : 6th January, 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. The petitioners have challenged the impugned order whereby while admitting the Appeal, the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court at Bombay, stayed the effect and operation of money decree dated 11.07.2007 by directing to deposit 50% of the decretal amount within eight weeks and allowed the respondent/plaintiffs to withdraw the said amount by furnishing the Bank Guarantee. 2. The respondents/plaintiffs’ Suit under Section 3(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (for short, "Maharashtra Rent Act") has been decreed on 25.11.2003. On 4.12.2003 the petitioners (original defendants) handed over the possession of the suit premises. The trial Court passed the impugned order to pay the mesne profits at the rate of Rs.30/- per ( 2 ) sq.ft. i.e. Rs.46,000/- per month against the original rent of Rs.750/- per month. The petitioners preferred the Appeal and the Appellate Court has passed the impugned order. As the Appeal is pending for final hearing, there is no question of observing anything on the merits of the matter. The fact remains that the Court, in pursuance to Order 20 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), after taking into consideration the material available on record, including the witnesses has determined the said mesne profits. The suit premises admeasuring 1600 sq.ft. on the first floor in building known as "J.P.House", Saki Naka on Kurla-Andheri Road, Mumbai-400072, were in occupation of the petitioners. The rate of Rs.30/- per sq.ft. is determined. However, the quantum is under challenge. The order of depositing 50% of the decretal amount, as there is clear decree against the petitioners, in my view, need no interference. There is no perversity. The interlocutory order as passed is within the frame work of law and the record. 3. Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed. The stay stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. However, further time of four weeks is granted from today to deposit the balance amount as the petitioners have already deposited Rs.1,50,000/- in ( 3 ) this court. The respondents are at liberty to withdraw the same by furnishing the Bank Guarantee as already ordered. No costs. 4. Certified copy expedited. [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.)