1 WP No.158/11 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.158 of 2011 Manilal R. Vira ... Petitioner versus (i) M/s.R.L. Finance and Investments (ii)M/s.Arihant Enterprises ... Respondents ... Mr. P.S. Dani i/b Manish P. Jagani for the petitioner CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 19th January 2011. P.C. 1. This Petition is directed against an interlocutory order fixing the compensation to be paid during the pendency of an appeal and calls for no interference in exercise of extra jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. A decree for eviction has been passed against the petitioner by the trial court. On appeal, execution of the decree has been stayed. After the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Atmaram’s case, landlord filed an application for a direction to the tenant to deposit compensation at the market rate as a condition for stay of the decree. The appellate court has fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.4,500/- 2 WP No.158/11 per month. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the quantum is too high and requires interference 3. The suit premises are situated in a commercial locality and used for a non residential purpose. According to the respondents, they are used as a godown and admeasures 176 sq.ft. Taking into consideration that the suit premises are situated in a commercial locality and are used for non residential purposes, the fixation of interim compensation @ Rs. 4500/- p.m cannot be said to be so off the mark so as to require interference in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected summarily. (D.G.KARNIK, J)