Order 1

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: CNR NO.MHSCA30008172024
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
[BANDRA BRANCH]
(Appellate Bench)
ORDER BELOW EXH-14
IN
A1- APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2024
IN
RAE & R SUIT NO. 598 OF 1997
Shri Chintaman Narayan Tambe though his C. A.
Smt. Seema Chintaman Tambe
...Appellant/
(Original
defendant )
Versus
Smt. Aparna Arvind Ambekar … Respondent/
(Original
Plaintiff)
Adv. Rameson S. Dias for the appellant.
Adv. Nitin S. Tungare for the respondent
Coram : Shri Ashish A. Ayachit
Additional Chief Judge,
&
Shri Dipak R. Mali, Judge
Court Room No. 41,
Date :15.12.2025
ORDER : - (Per Shri Dipak R. Mali, Judge)
This is an application filed by the appellant/original
defendant for grant of stay to the execution of the impugned decree
passed by the learned trial court in RAE & R Suit No. 598 of 1997
dated 12.07.2014.
-- 1 of 6 --
EXH-14-A1 APPEAL-63--2024. 2 of 6 Order
2. It is submitted by the appellant/original defendant that
the present appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree
dated 12.07.2024 passed in RAE & R Suit No. 598 of 1997. It is
submitted that the appellant has reasonable chances of succeeding in
the appeal. Great harm and prejudice will be caused to appellant, if
the stay application is not allowed. If decree for possession granted
by the trial court is executed, then the appellant will suffer grave
harm and loss. Hence, it is prayed that the stay application may be
allowed and execution of decree passed in RAE & R Suit No. 598 of
1997 may be stayed till the final disposal of the present appeal.
3. Respondent/original plaintiff has strongly resisted the
application by filing reply vide Exh. 16 and denied all the
contentions made in the application. It is submitted that it is a
settled position of law that after passing of the eviction decree by the
court, the status of the tenant does not remain as a tenant and he
remains as an lawful occupant. The appellant is enjoying the suit
premises at a meager rent of Rs. 37/- per month. If the court is
inclined to grant stay, as per the Valuation report submitted by
expert valuer Mr. Sanjay Joshi, the appellant must be ordered to
deposit amount of Rs.12,800/- by way of monthly compensation.
Finally, it is prayed that the application may be rejected.
4. We have heard the learned Advocates for both the
parties. After considering the application and reply, following points
arise for our determination and we have recorded our findings with
reasons thereto as under :
-- 2 of 6 --
EXH-14-A1 APPEAL-63--2024. 3 of 6 Order
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the Judgment and decree passed
in RAE & R Suit No.598 of 1997 dated
12.07.2024 needs to be stayed? If yes, on
what conditions?
“In the affirmative.”
2 What Order? “As per final order.”
R E A S O N S
As to Point Nos. 1 and 2:-
5. The learned Advocate for the appellant has argued that
the decree of eviction needs to be stayed till disposal of this appeal
because the appellant will suffer irreparable loss if decree is executed
by the respondent /org. Plaintiff.
6. The learned Advocate for the respondent /Org.
plaintiff opposed for grant of stay. He argued that the prevailing
market rate in respect of the premises located in the vicinity of the
suit premises fetches license fee @ Rs. 12,800/- per month. He
alternatively submitted that if the Court comes to the conclusion that
stay needs to be granted, then the compensation at the rate of
Rs.12,800/- per month may be awarded. In support of his
submission, he has annexed copy of Valuation Report of Shri Sanjay
E. Joshi, registered valuer.
7. Admittedly, RAE & R Suit No. 598 of 1997 has been
decreed by Judgment and decree dated 12.07.2024 and the
appellant /defendant is directed to hand over vacant and peaceful
possession of the suit premises to the respondent /Org. plaintiff. The
-- 3 of 6 --
EXH-14-A1 APPEAL-63--2024. 4 of 6 Order
appellant has challenged the said Judgment and decree by filing
present appeal. If, the impugned decree to the extent of possession is
not stayed till the judgment in this appeal, then, the substantive right
of the appellant/ Org. defendant to challenge the judgment and
decree would be frustrated.
8. In view of observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Atmaram Properties (P) Ltd. V/s.Federal Motors (P) Ltd
reported in (2005) 1 Supreme Court Cases 705), dispossession
during the pendency of the appeal is generally considered as
substantial loss to the appellant. Hence, it is necessary to stay the
Judgment and decree for possession. At the same time, as per
settled principle of law, reasonable amount needs to be granted for
the use and occupation of the suit premises and to compensate the
respondent (decree holder) for the loss occasioned by delay in
execution of decree. For that purpose, it is necessary to take into
consideration the factual position and condition of the suit premises.
9. The suit premises is a residential premises bearing Room
No. 4 in Malvankar Chawl, Joshiwadi, Sahar Road, Chakala, Andheri
(E), Mumbai -400 099. The suit premises is admeasuring about 150
sq.ft. The valuation report shows that the original area of suit
premises is 150 sq.ft. and extended area is 50 sq.ft. Such extended
area need not be considered for calculation of interim compensation.
In another appeal bearing 2A appeal No. 34 of 2024 wherein the
premises is located in the same area where the suit premises of
present appeal is located, both the parties have agreed for
compensation of Rs. 5000/- per month for staying the operation and
-- 4 of 6 --
EXH-14-A1 APPEAL-63--2024. 5 of 6 Order
execution of the decree. However, the area in the said suit is
admeasuring about 100 sq.ft. only and the premises in this matter is
about 150 sq.ft. Thus, taking into account the area and condition
of the suit premises, we consider it just and reasonable to fix interim
compensation at Rs.7500/- per month and it would be just, sufficient
and proper as compensation, while granting stay to the impugned
Judgment and decree. This is an interim compensation. The party
who succeed in litigation will get the amount. Moreover, this
amount may be considered in mesne profit inquiry, if any ordered by
the Court. Hence, it will not be punitive to appellant and it will also
protect the interest of respondent. Accordingly, we answer point
No.1 in the 'affirmative' and in answer to point No.2, we proceed to
pass following order.
O R D E R
1. The execution of judgment and decree passed by
the learned trial court in RAE & R Suit No. 598 of
1997 dated 12.07.2024 is hereby stayed till the
final decision of the appeal subject to compliance of
following conditions:
2. (i)The appellant shall deposit interim compensation
@ 7500/- ( Seven Thousand Five Hundred only)
per month towards use and occupation of the suit
premises from the date of decree i.e. 12.07.2024 till
December 2025 within the period of two Months
from the date of this order.
(ii)The appellant shall continue to deposit interim
monthly compensation @ Rs.7500/- (Seven
Thousand Five Hundred only) per month from
January, 2026 onwards till the disposal of the
present appeal, on or before 10th day of every
succeeding month.
-- 5 of 6 --
EXH-14-A1 APPEAL-63--2024. 6 of 6 Order
(iii)Additional Registrar of this court is hereby
directed to invest the amount of compensation as
and when deposited by the appellants in fixed
Deposit for a term of at least one year in any
Nationalized Bank immediately on very next
working day as per rules.
3. If, the appellant fail to comply with this order as
directed, then, stay granted by this order
automatically stands vacated.
4. The appellant shall give an Undertaking that she
will not dispose, alienate, transfer, assign her rights
to third parties or she will not induct any third
party in the suit premises during the pendency of
the appeal.
I Agree,
(Ashish A. Ayachit) (Dipak R. Mali)
Addl. Chief Judge Judge,
C.R. No. 41 C.R. No. 41
Court of Small Causes,(B.B) Court of Small Causes,(B.B)
15.12.2025 15.12.2025
Order dictated on : 15.12.2025
Order transcribed on : 15.12.2025
Order checked & signed on: 15.12.2025
/home/steno41/Desktop/CR-41/DECEMBER-25/ORDER/EXH-14-A-1 APPEAL-63-2024 stay applicatin.odt Shubhada Shanbhag
-- 6 of 6 --