Vaibhav A. Sugdare

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3800 OF 2012 Smt. Lalita Atmaprakash Rajpal & Anr. ..Petitioners. Versus Jitendrasingh R. Kushawaha and Others. ..Respondents. Mr. Motkari i/b Ms. Archana Khan for the Petitioner. Mr. Vaibhav A. Sugadare for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : August 23, 2012 . P. C. : Heard. The writ petition arises out of the proceedings under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. At the instance of Respondent, eviction decree is passed against the Petitioner by the learned trial Court on the ground of non user, nuisance, additions and alternations. The Petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate bench of the Small Causes Court. The appeal is admitted and interim stay is also granted. In this appeal, the Respondent-landlord took out an application for direction to the Petitioner to deposit market rent of the suit premises. This application is allowed and the learned appellate Court directed the Petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month towards the compensation for the use and occupation of the suit premises. The area of the suit premises is 320 sq. ft., which is being used for residential purposes. The premises are situated at Crawford Market area, which is the busiest locality. The learned appellate Court considered the age and condition of the building in which the premises are situated and also took into consideration the locality of premises. The Court also considered the valuer's report and fixed the compensation at Rs.6,000/- per month. In my view, in the facts and circumstances of the case, compensation of Rs.6,000/- cannot said to be exorbitant. I do not find any merit in the petition and same is accordingly dismissed. At the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner, time to deposit arrears of compensation as per the impugned order, is extended by three months from today. (RANJIT MORE, J.)