The rental rates in Delhi are hiking and the recent remark made by the Delhi High Court reflected the same when it said that the rent of even a hutment in Delhi is Rs. 3,000 and therefore, a mesne profit of Rs. 10,000 awarded in a case cannot be called excessive.
“The suit property is a property of 100 sq yard in New Delhi and when even a hutment costs Rs. 3,000 per month as rent in Delhi, then there is no reason why rate of mesne profits of Rs. 10,000 per month of a 100 sq yard in New Delhi can be argued to be in any manner excessive,” remarked Justice Valmiki J Mehta.
The court made the remark when during the hearing of appeal in a property suit, the party told to pay damages of Rs. 10,000 per month for illegal use of a property to its rightful owner called the amount excessive.
Justice Mehta said he could not agree with the argument that the mesne profit is excessive.
In the instant case, the appellants were told to pay the mesne profit of Rs. 10,000 per month to the rightful owner of a property in West Arjun Nagar in Southwest Delhi.
The appellants were held to be in wrongful possession of the suit property admeasuring 100 sq yard, which they said was transferred to them by the respondents (before the high court) even when the ownership of the property stood transferred to its rightful owner by way of a Will executed by one Chander Pal in year 2005.
While Chander Pal’s son, in whose name the property was left, applied for probate during the pendency of probate petition, an order was passed in the year 2008 that no third party interest shall be created in the property.
Despite the said order, the respondents transferred the property to the appellants for a consideration of Rs. 10.5 lakh. The appellants claimed to be bonafide purchasers.
When the suit came up for trial, the court declared the sale deed illegal and the high court also held in appeal that once a probate petition is allowed and a Will is probated, judgment in such a case operates not only between the parties to the probate petition, but also against all other persons.
Read the Judgment Here