Appellate courts have the authority to set reasonable terms for occupational charges during stays on eviction orders, considering current market values.

JUDGMENT :

ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.

In Re: IA No. CAN/4/2022

1. This is an application for modification of an order dated January 7, 2014, passed in this second appeal. By that order, a Coordinate Bench admitted the appeal on the questions of law recorded in the order and further directed “stay of operation of the decree provided the appellant would continue to pay Rs. 50,000/- per month as occupation charges for the suit premises commencing from January, 2013, until further order.” There was also a direction for payment of the arrear amount in 12 equal monthly instalments. We are told that the arrear amount has been paid.

2. The material facts of the case in so far as the same are relevant for the present purpose, are that the respondents/applicants are the owners of land measuring about 31.09 kathas on Hill Cart Road in Siliguri. The predecessor in interest of the first applicant along with other owners of the land entered into a lease agreement Dated March 1, 1962, with one Standard Vacuum Oil Company for a period of 10 years with an option for renewal of the lease for a further period of ten years, in respect of the said land. In 1974, Standard Vacuum Oil Company came to be known as ESSO Standard Eastern Inc. Subsequently, ESSO was converted to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (in short “HPCL”) the present appellant, under an acquisition made by the Government of India. In the year 1988, an ejectment suit being O.C. Suit No. 23 of 1988 was filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the applicants against HPCL, in the Court of the learned Munsiff at Siliguri. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs on June 19, 1995. The plaintiffs being the predecessors in interest of the present applicants, were granted khas possession of the suit property and the appellant herein was directed to vacate the said property by the end of August, 1995.

3. The appellant challenged the decree before the learned District Judge at Darjeeling by filing Appeal No. 2 of 1995. The appeal was dismissed by a judgment and order dated December 19, 2012. Against such dismissal order, the present second appeal has been preferred by HPCL.

4. At the time of the admission of the second appeal the order dated January 7, 2014 was passed by a Coordinate Bench, modification of which is sought for by the applicants (respondents in the appeal) in the present application.

5. The applicants say that occupational charge of Rs. 50,000/- per month is not commensurate with the actual value of the land in question. The land is situate in a prime commercial locality in the heart of Siliguri. The property is adjacent to the Courtyard of Hotel Marriot. The applicants rely on a valuation report dated September 13, 2022, furnished by a Government approved Valuer namely Shri P.K. Das who is also registered with the Income Tax Department. According to such report the present market value of the land in question is approximately Rs. 31.09 Crore and the present monthly occupational charge would be Rs. 11,66,000/-.

6. The applicants also rely on an E-Assessment Slip issued by the government of West Bengal, Directorate of Registration & Stamp Revenue which shows that the market value of the land as approximately Rs. 38.10 Crore.

7. Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that once an eviction decree has been passed and execution is delayed due to operation of stay order of the appellate forum, depriving the decree holder of the fruits of the decree, the appellate forum should pass appropriate orders so that reasonable occupational charge equivalent to the market rent is paid by the judgment debtor who is holding on to the property in