Kothari Bhawan, Gopal Ji Ka Rasta, Jaipur v. Laxmi Nagar, Brahmpuri, Jaipur

Judgment

1. Gordhan Mehta S/o Late Shri Panraj Mehta, R/o 403, Laxmi Nagar, Brahmpuri, Jaipur (Deceased Through Ap- peal) Through Legal Heir.

2. Surendra Mehta S/o Late Gordhan Mehta, R/o 403, Laxmi Nagar, Brahmpuri, Jaipur. At Present 22, Jai Jawan Colony

First, Tonk Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents-Plaintiffs For Appellant(s) : Mr. R. K. Agarwal, Senior Adv. as- sisted by Ms. Apeksha Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Shubham Sharma, Adv. Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. K. Daga, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA 07/05/2025 Order By this order, the second stay application filed by the appellant-defendant (for short ‘the defendant’) is being decided. Learned senior counsel for the defendant submits that the plaintiff-respondent (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against the defendant which was dismissed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 02.11.2018. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 02.11.2018, the plaintiff filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court. The First [2025:RJ-JP:19249] (2 of 5) [CSA-205/2020] Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 15.02.2020 while partly allowing the appeal filed by the plaintiff, set-aside the judg- ment and decree passed by the trial court. Learned senior counsel for the defendant further submits that the defendant filed the second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 15.02.2020. This court vide order dated

06.07.2020 stayed the effect and operation of the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court. Learned senior counsel for the defendant also submits that on 27.08.2022, the second ap- peal was admitted on the substantial questions of law, as formu- lated in the said order and following directions were issued. “In the present case the property in question is stated to be taken on rent by the defendant at a monthly rent of Rs. 200/- prior to 1987. The rate of the property, more particularly in Gopal Ji Ka Rasta, Johri Bazar, which is the main centre for jewellery business, have been escalated since then. Looking to the overall facts of this case which includes size of the shop, its location as well as other sur- rounding circumstances, the interim order dated

06.07.2020 passed by this Court is confirmed till disposal of the appeal, provided that the defendant shall pay/de- posit mesne profit @ Rs. 50,000/- per month from the date of the judgment and decree i.e. 15.02.2020 passed by the appellate court in the bank account of the plaintiff within two months from today and continues to pay the mesne profit at the same rate by 15th of each succeeding month, failing which the plaintiff shall be at liberty to ex- ecute the decree without any further order from the [2025:RJ-JP:19249] (3 of 5) [CSA-205/2020] Court. It is made clear that if any amount has already been paid/deposited by the defendant, same shall be ad- justed towards arrears of mesne profit. It is also made clear that if the defendant fails to pay/deposit the monthly mesne profit consecutively for four months, the plaintiff shall be at liberty to execute the decree without any further order from the Court.” Learned senior counsel for the defendant also submits that the defendant challenged the said order by way of Special Leave Petition(SLP) before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 18.11.2022 dismissed the SLP with permission to the defendant to move an appropriate application before this court. Learned senior counsel for the defendant also submits that the defendant filed the review petition for review of the order dated 27.08.2022 but the said review petition was withdrawn on

08.05.2023. Learned senior counsel for the defendant further submits that as per the order dated 27.08.2022, the plaintiff-landlord had to furnish his bank account details to the defendant within 15 days but the plaintiff gave the said bank account details on 16.12.2022. As the defendant had preferred SLP before the Hon’ble Apex Court, the defendant deposited the monthly mesne profit of Rs.50,000/- within time, but arrears of Rs.15,50,000/- was de- posited on 12.06.2023. The defendant filed the application before the Executing Court for staying the execution, but the Executing Court rejected the application filed by the defendant vide order dated [2025:RJ-JP:19249] (4 of 5) [CSA-205/2020]

07.02.2025. The defendant preferred the writ petition against the said order, which was also disposed of with liberty to the defen- dant to avail appropriate remedy in the civil second appeal. Learned senior counsel for the defendant also submits that the plaintiff had not furnished his bank account details within the time, so delay in depositing the amount be condoned. The defen- dant had a bonafide cause for condonation of the delay because the defendant had availed appropriate remedy before the Hon’ble Apex Court. So, second stay application filed by the defendant be allowed. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel for the defendant and submit- ted that the defendant had to deposit the arrears of rent within two months as per the order dated 27.08.2022. The plaintiff filed an application regarding furnishing his bank account details on

31.10.2022 after giving a copy thereof to learned counsel for the defendant. The Hon’ble Apex Court has not considered the objec- tion raised by the defendant. Review petition was also withdrawn by the defendant. So, there is no ground for condonation of delay. So, second stay application filed by the defendant be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel for the defendant as well as learned counsel for the plaintiff. This court vide order dated 27.08.2022 while admitting the second appeal, directed the defendant to deposit the arrears within two months and also directed the plaintiff to furnish his bank details within 15 days. The plaintiff furnished his bank details by way of filing an application on 31.10.2022 and copy of the said [2025:RJ-JP:19249] (5 of 5) [CSA-205/2020] application was given to learned counsel for the defendant. Special Leave Petition filed by the defendant was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 18.11.2022 with liberty to the defen- dant to avail appropriate legal remedy before this court. Review application was also withdrawn by the defendant. It is an admitted position that the defendant had deposited the arrears of rent after an inordinate delay of about 6 months. The defendant had not shown any bonafide cause for condonation of the said delay. So, I do not consider it a fit case to allow the second stay application filed by the defendant. Hence, the second stay application filed by the defendant is dismissed. Gourav/122 (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J