N.K. Jain, J.—Heard learned counsel for both the parties on the stay application.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant-appellants submits that the appeal has been admitted today and the impugned decree being a decree of eviction, the ex-parte interim stay order dt. 03.12.2001 passed by this Court may be confirmed till the last disposal of this second appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondents contended that the First Appellate Court has considered the evidence in detail while deciding Issue Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of the plaintiff-respondents and has rightly recorded a finding that the tenant-appellant has alternative accommodation and he is not residing in the rented premises, in dispute, therefore, rightly decreed the suit for eviction on the ground of availability of alternative accommodation as well as non-user of the rented premises and in view of the fact that he is not residing in the rented premises the interim stay order should be vacated.

4. In alternative Mr. M.M. Ranjan, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondents contended that in case this Court confirms the stay order, then at least the plaintiff-respondent is entitled to get mesne profit, as per the pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document