SANJIB BANERJEE, J.

(1.) THE advocate commissioners assessment of mesne profits is assailed by both sets of parties: to a larger extent by the defendant on the monthly rate arrived at; and, to a lesser extent by the plaintiffs on the count of interest.

(2.) THE defendant vacated the Lord Sinha Road building flat on October 31, 1999, having overstayed its invitation by some eight years after the expiry of the tenure covered by the lease. The inquiry into mesne profits of the third floor flat on one of the older highrises in the city was pursuant to a direction of court. The suit premises include an apartment with a carpet area of about 1804 sq. ft. which works out to a super built-up area of about 2405 sq. ft. In addition to the enjoyment of the flat came the servants quarters of floor area of 60 sq. ft. translating to a super built-up area of 75 sq. ft. and a covered car parking space to accommodate a decent-sized car.

(3.) UNDER the lease of January 16, 1965, the defendant was required to pay monthly rent of Rs. 950/- for a period of 21 years with an option for extension. The plaintiffs claimed possession upon asserting that the defendant was not entitled to remain in possession beyond October 31, 1991. In the suit the plaintiff sought mesne profits at Rs. 2,000/- per diem or, alternatively an inquiry therefor.

(4.) THE advocate commissioner has recorded in his report, running into 23 pages, the reasons given by the plaintiff in seeking mesne profits at a high rate. The area in which the building is situated was once an up-market residential area that has fallen prey to commerce over the last two decades, though the building continues to be used for residential purpose. Before the commissioner the plaintiffs suggested that the buildings proximity to the lungs of Calcutta around the Maidan on the one side and the glitz and glamour of yore of nearby park Street on the other, would make many covet a flat at the building and thus command a high letting-out value. The defendant, as would be its wont, urged before the commissioner that the building had fallen into disrepair and mesne profits had to be assessed on the condition of the building rather than the location thereof.

(5.) EITHER sets of parties examined witnesses which, it appears, did not count for much with the commissioner and he proceeded to refer to all but arrive at an assessment of mesne profits quite a distance removed from the desperate suggestions thereto put forward by the parties. In the commissioners assessment-and in all propriety he merely suggested -the plaintiffs were entitled to receive mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. ft. per month for a carpet area of 1900 sq. ft. including the servants quarters and the covered car parking space. At such rate the monthly value suggested by the commissioner is Rs. 28,500/- for a total of Rs. 27,36,000/-for the period of 96 (erroneously stated as 26) months. The commissioner suggested that the plaintiff would be entitled to simple interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the entire quantum till realisation. The defendant challenges the suggestion of the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. ft. and the plaintiffs complain that interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum is abysmally low. The two applications come as the epilogue to the suit.

(6.) THE defendant assails the commissioners assessment on the basis in arriving at the figure. The defendant suggests that the commissioner did not disclose, upon his rejecting the overvalued and undervalued assessments of the respective parties, how he came about the figure of Rs. 15/-per sq. ft. The defendant attacks the mental process that the report reveals, of the commissioner having based his approximation on the value of the property. Mesne profits, the defendant insists, cannot be a percentage of the value of the property but would be needed to be arrived at on other considerations.

(7.) THE plaintiffs say that they have resigned to accept the suggesti