Jai Prakash vs Gulab Singh Rathore
- CitationAIRONLINE 2009 SC 87
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An award of damages calculated at a fixed daily rate from the date of filing of an eviction petition until delivery of possession to the landlord is not justified in law and shall be set aside, even where an ex-parte decree for eviction and arrears of rent has been properly passed and executed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Jai Prakash ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Gulab Singh Rathore ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The Trial Court passed an ex-parte decree for eviction and directed the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.29,700/- as arrears of rent and damages at the rate of Rs.27.50 per day from the date of filing of the eviction petition till the date the possession is delivered to the landlord. The appellant filed a petition under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was rejected by the Trial Court and the said order has been confirmed by the High Court in revision. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
It is not in dispute that after the passing of the ex-parte decree, possession of the premises in question was delivered to the landlord who let out the same to another person on 5th March, 2002. In view of this development, we are not inclined to interfere with the decree for eviction and arrears of rent for Rs.29,700/-. However, we do not find any justification for the decree of damages at the rate of Rs.27.50 per day from the date of filing of the eviction petition till the date the possession is delivered to the landlord.
...2/-
-2- Accordingly, the award of damages at the rate of Rs.27.50 per day from the date of filing of the eviction petition till the date the vacant possession is delivered to the landlord is hereby set aside.
The civil appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
......................J. [B.N. AGRAWAL]
......................J. [G.S. SINGHVI] New Delhi, March 19, 2009.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free