The judgment established the legal principle that the rent payable for the suit premises was Rs.10,000/- per month and not Rs.6,000/- per month, and that mesne profits could be granted at a rate of Rs.15,000/- per month from 1.4.1998, with a cumulative increase of 10% per annum.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. The respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 has died during the pendency of the appeal and an oral request of learned counsel for the parties is accepted, whereby respondent No.2/plaintiff No.2 being the wife of respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 is substituted as a legal heir of respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1. The name of respondent No.1 is, accordingly, deleted from the array of parties. For the sake of convenience the original plaintiffs are referred to as the respondents/plaintiffs.

2. The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 16.4.2004 decreeing the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs for arrears of rent and mesne profits. The respondents/plaintiffs have also filed cross-objections in this appeal, inasmuch as, the respondents/plaintiffs claim that the arrears of rent ought to have been granted at Rs.10,000/- per month and not Rs.6,000/- per month, and there should be enhancement in the rate of the mesne profits granted.

3. The facts of the case are that the appellant No.1/defendant No.1 became a tenant in the first floor portion of the property being C-52, Soami Nagar, New Delhi – 110 017 under the respondents/plaintiffs in the year 1993. The premises were let out for the residence of appellant No.2/defendant No.2. There were two documents creating the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. One was an unregistered lease deed dated 26.8.1993 for a period of two years at rent of Rs.6,000/- per month, and another was an agreement of the same date for hire charges of the fittings and fixtures @ Rs.4,000/- per month. Effectively, therefore, a sum of Rs.10,000/- was payable as rent of the premises. I may note that now as per innumerable judgments of this Court, hire charges are taken as part and parcel of the rent, inasmuch as, they are charges for use of the rented premises.

4. The tenancy being a monthly tenancy, was terminated by the plaintiffs/respondents/landlords by a legal notice dated 2.3.1998, and receipt of which is not disputed by the appellants/defendants. The said notice was in fact replied to by the appellants/defendants vide reply dated 23.4.1998. In the notice, the respondents/plaintiffs claimed arrears of rent @Rs.10,000/-from 1.9.1995 to 31.3.1998 and mesne profits from 1.4.1998 till the date when physical possession of the tenanted premises is handed over. During the pendency of the suit, which was filed for possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits, the respondents/landlords filed an application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC with respect to the relief of possession, and which application on being allowed, and the order being upheld by this Court, the appellants/defendants handed over possession in January, 2001. The respondents/plaintiffs, however, claimed that the possession was handed over in March, 2001.

5. By the impugned judgment the trial Court has decided the issue of whether arrears of rent were payable from 1.9.1995 to 31.3.1998, and if yes at what rate. The impugned judgment also grants a decree for mesne profits @ Rs.12,000/- per month from 1.4.1998 till March, 2001, which is the month which the trial Court found when the appellants/defendants handed over physical possession of the suit premises. The counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs state that possession was taken by the respondents/plaintiffs in execution proceedings with the assistance of the Court bailiff.

6. The issues before this Court, and which I am called upon to decide in accordance with the arguments which have been so urged on behalf of the respective parties are as under:-

(i) Whether the respondents/plaintiffs/landlords ought to be allowed arrears of rent at Rs.10,000/- per month and not Rs.6,000/-per month, as granted by the trial Court from 1.9.1995 to 31.3.1998 i.e. not at Rs.6,000/- per month as granted by the trial Court?

(ii) Whether the payment of Rs.1,20