Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Bsnl) New Delhi Thru… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2025)

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Bsnl) New Delhi Thru… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the quantum of damages/mesne profits fixed by the Court below after remand (Rs.21,400/- per month from September 2009, with 15% enhancement after every three years till handing over of possession) calls for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

Court's answer

Since the revisionists did not adduce any evidence to discredit the exemplar cited by the respondent, and no material discrediting the exemplar was placed even before this Court, the SCC Court rightly determined the quantum of damages/mesne profits.

Ratio / Principle

The delay in filing the present revision is condoned.

Key takeaways

No interference is called for in exercise of revisional jurisdiction with the quantum determination made by the Court below.ratio¶7
The revision is dismissed.ratio¶7
Any amount already paid by the revisionists shall be adjusted towards the calculation of the rent/damages.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Pankaj Bhatia, J.; order dated 15.5.2025; Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:28686) dismisses the S.C.C. REVISION DEFECTIVE No. 6 of 2025 filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) challenging the order dated 08.02.2024 of the Additional District Judge, Sultanpur in SCC Suit No. 01 of 2010. After a prior remand by this Court for fresh ascertainment of mesne profits, the Court below had re-determined the quantum at Rs.21,400/- per month payable from September 2009 with 15% enhancement after every three years till handing over of possession, taking into consideration an exemplar lease-deed under which similar premises were let to a multi-national bank at Rs.17,000/- per month. Holding that the revisionists had adduced no evidence to discredit the exemplar, and that no material discrediting it was placed even before this Court, the Court found the quantum rightly determined, declined interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, dismissed the revision (delay in filing condoned), and directed that any amounts already paid be adjusted towards the calculation of the rent/damages.

E Court

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28686

Court No. - 6

Case :- S.C.C. REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 6 of 2025

Revisionist :- Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Bsnl) New Delhi Thru. Chairman/C.M.D. And Another

Opposite Party :- Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Sultanpur And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Yogesh Chandra Bhatt,Anurag Srivastava,Mohd. Aatif Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sharad Pathak,Saurabh Pathak

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

The delay in filing the present revision is condoned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The present revision has been filed by the revisionists challenging an order dated 08.02.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Sultanpur in SCC Suit No. 01 of 2010.

The facts in brief are that the revisionists were the occupants as tenant in the premises owned by the respondent in terms of an agreement executed inter-say in between the parties. The agreement commenced from 20.08.2004 and ended on 19.08.2009, the rent as mutually fixed was Rs.8000/- per month. Thereafter, the revisionists continued to be in occupation of the premises on

the basis of enhanced rent, which was increased to Rs.8800/- per month for the further period of five years. However, no agreement was executed intersay in between the parties. The respondent on the other hand instituted a SCC Suit No. 01 of 2010, in which an application was filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which came to be allowed by the Court below on 05.05.2010. An application was filed for recall of the order dated 05.05.2010, which was rejected on 21.04.2012. Aggrieved against the said order, the respondent preferred a Civil Revision No. 52 of 2012, which came to be allowed on 25.02.2014 and the order dated 05.05.2010 was set aside. Thereafter, the revisionists filed their written statement in the SCC suit. Initially, two issues were framed inter-say in between the parties with regard to service of notice. Ultimately the suit came to be decided in favour of the respondent and suit was decreed for ejectment and arrears of damages were quantified at Rs.10400/- per month. Aggrieved against the said, the respondent preferred a revision before this Court, wherein the matter was remanded for ascertaining the mesne profits afresh.

It is also bears from the record that the premises was vacated on 08.01.2016. The parties are in dispute with regard to the date of possession. The counsel for the respondent states that the actual possession was delivered to the respondent through an intervention of Amin on 07.09.2018.

Be that as it may, after the remand by this Court, the issue no. 2 was re-determined with regard to quantum of damages and mense profits. In support of the claim of the respondent, the respondent relied upon a lease-deed, wherein a similar premises was leased to one multi-national bank on a monthly rent of Rs.17000/-. The Court below taking into consideration the said exemplar has fixed the mense profits at Rs.21,400/- per month, which was directed to be paid from September, 2009 with 15% enhancement on the rent/damages after every three years till the handing over of the possession of the disputed property to the plaintiff.

Considering the fact that the revisionists did not adduce any evidence, to discredit the exemplar cited by the respondent, the SCC Court has rightly determined the quantum, there being no material placed even before this Court to discredit the exemplar cited by the respondent. No interference is called for in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. The revision is accordingly dismissed. Any amount paid by the revisionists shall be adjusted towards the calculation of the rent/damages.

Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Arun

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 08.02.2024 in SCC Suit No. 01 of 2010 passed after remand, re-determining issue No. 2 on quantum: mesne profits/damages fixed at Rs.21,400/- per month from September 2009 with 15% enhancement after every three years till handing over of possession, taking into consideration an exemplar lease-deed of comparable premises.¶3
Additional District Judge, Sultanpur · 08.02.2024
Prior proceeding
Revisionists occupied the premises as tenants of the respondent under an agreement running from 20.08.2004 to 19.08.2009 at mutually fixed rent of Rs.8000/- per month.¶4
Prior proceeding
After expiry of the agreement, the revisionists continued in occupation at an enhanced rent of Rs.8800/- per month for a further period of five years; no fresh agreement was executed between the parties.¶4
Prior proceeding
The respondent instituted SCC Suit No. 01 of 2010 against the revisionists.¶4
Prior proceeding
An application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act filed in the SCC suit was allowed by the Court below on 05.05.2010.¶4
Prior proceeding
An application for recall of the order dated 05.05.2010 was rejected on 21.04.2012.¶4
Prior proceeding
The respondent's Civil Revision No. 52 of 2012 was allowed on 25.02.2014 and the order dated 05.05.2010 was set aside.¶4
Prior proceeding
The revisionists thereafter filed their written statement in the SCC suit; initially two issues were framed with regard to service of notice.¶4
Prior proceeding
The suit was decided in favour of the respondent and decreed for ejectment, with arrears of damages quantified at Rs.10400/- per month.¶4
Prior proceeding
Aggrieved, the respondent preferred a revision before this Court, wherein the matter was remanded for ascertaining the mesne profits afresh.¶4
Prior proceeding
The premises were vacated on 08.01.2016; the parties remained in dispute with regard to the date of possession.¶5
Prior proceeding
Counsel for the respondent stated that actual possession was delivered to the respondent through the intervention of an Amin on 07.09.2018.¶5
Prior proceeding
After the remand, issue No. 2 was re-determined on quantum of damages and mesne profits: the respondent relied upon a lease-deed of similar premises let to a multi-national bank at Rs.17000/- per month as exemplar, and the Court below fixed mesne profits at Rs.21,400/- per month from September 2009 with 15% enhancement after every three years till handing over of possession.¶6