IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:03.11.2025 PAWAN BHATIA …Petitioner VERSUS BALDEV KRISHAN SETHI …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate and Mr. Sanyam Khetarpal, Advocate for petitioner.

***

PARMOD GOYAL. J (ORAL)

1. In present case, petitioner-tenant has challenged impugned order dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P-5) passed by appellate authority, Chandigarh vide which application for fixing mesne profit preferred by landlord was allowed in appeal preferred by tenant against his eviction, fixing mesne profit @ Rs.70,000/- per month.

2. Admittedly, eviction petition u/s 13(3)(a)(i) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 preferred by landlord was allowed by learned Rent Controller vide order dated 15.05.2023 (Annexure P-1). Against that order, petitioner-tenant had preferred an appeal before first appellate Court. Before the first appellate Court, landlord-respondent had preferred an application under Order XX Rule 12 read with Section 151 CPC for fixation of mesne profits/damages at market rate as after eviction tenant is stated to be in illegal use and occupation of demised premises.

3. Lear