Monday, 25 July 2016

MESNE PROFIT AS IN CPC.



Mesne Profit
 

·        Meaning:
§  The term mesne profit is defined in S. 2 (12) of Code of Civil Procedure 1908, as follows:
" mesne profits " of property means those profits which the person in wrongful possession of such property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received there from, together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the person in wrongful possession.
§  The Hon’ble Delhi high Court made following observations regarding mesne profit In Phiraya Lal alias Piara lal v. Jia Rani [1]observed that, “when damages are claimed in respect of wrongful occupation of immovable property on the basis of the loss caused by the wrongful possession of the trespasser to the person entitled to the possession of the immovable property, these damages are called mesne profits”.
§  Wrongful possession of the defendant is the very essence of the claim for mesne profit
No claim for mesne profit if the possession of the defendant has not been wrongful[2]

·        Applicability:
§  The court at times may pass a decree for mesne profit or order an enquiry regarding mesne profit before passing such a decree[3]. Where such an inquiry has been directed then final decree shall be passed in accordace with the findings of such an enquiry.  
§  The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Nataraja Achari v. Balambal Ammal observed that mesne profit arises in the following three cases:[4]
1.      Suit for ejectment or recovery of possession of immovable property from a person in possession without title, together with a claim for past or past and future mesne profits.
2. A suit for partition by one or more tenants in common against others with a claim for account of past or past and future profits.
3. Suits for partition by a member of joint Hindu family with a claim for an account from the manager
§  By the laws of equitable justice it is construed that it has to be given  to the owner who demands such profit. The rule regarding demand of mesne profit by co-owner is as follows:
A co-owner can sue the wrong doer for mesne profit and get the mesne amount not only up to the percentage of share in the property but for the whole amount decreed on the property[5].
§  Where a specific performance has been decreed on a decree debtor and for such performance the decree debtor is in possession of property then a decree for mesne profit cannot be obtained against him[6]
§  A mortgage is not liable for mesne profit from the date when  the decree for mortgage debt has discharged[7]

§  The concept of Mesne profit does not apply where a co-parcener is demanding share in the property.
§  When the lower court has refused the relief with regards   mesne profit then a further application in this regard would be barred[8]. From this we can summarise that;
§  In case of refusal by lower court it cannot be pleaded later
§  In case of silence on this matter by lower court it can be pleaded and the court may grant relief in this regard.
§  Note: Any decree regarding mesne profit passed in a suit shall be treated as a preliminary decree until the moment an application for future mesne profit is disposed and is incorporated in final decree[9].
§  Suit for compensation for use and occupation of property is outside the rule. 
§  Mesne profit cannot be used to recover enhanced rent.
§  The burden of proof of proving the amount received is on the person who has received it

·         Calculation:
§  It can be construed from definition of mesne profit as mentioned above in meaning, mesne profit includes mesne profit and interest on mesne profit
§  A court has given a decree with regards to mesne profit but is silent regarding interest on mesne profit then such a decree must construe to be carrying interest as well[10].   
§  Mesne profit cannot be charged on any profit which is gained by the decree debtor by modifying the premises.[11]
§  If the rate of interest is not decreed then the omission to fix the rate of interest should be deemed to be a mistake committed by the officer responsible for drafting the decree. The decree holder is free to apply to the court to have the decree amended.
§  Once the aggregate amount of mesne profit and interest there on is ascertained then an application for final decree for such amount can be made by the judgement debtor. In this regard the court may award interest at such rate as it thinks fit.[12]     
                        
§  Liability of the mesne profit is to be determined on the basis of the present condition of the property and not on the basis of what profit can be earned after the tenant leaves.
§  The mesne profit should be calculated till the duration when the goods are actually delivered to the decree  holder[13],[14]
§  Mesne profit can be calculated with due diligence when  it can be ordinarily  assumed that a higher profit could have been achieved but a lower has been achieved. Thus mesne profit a profit on higher profit may be considered[15] ;
e.x, A land is where ordinarily sugarcane is cultivated but the defendant cultivated vegetables. Then the court may calculate mesne profit assuming that sugarcane was cultivated 
§  Where the plaintiff did not produce any evidence in support of the amount of mesne profit claimed by him and also admitted in examination in chief that there was no basis for mesne profit claimed in the plaint; The court has considered the profit from other surrounding areas to determine the mesne profit due by the plaintiff[16].
§  There is no rigid rule for determining the amount of mesne profit and the amount must be assessed in every case by proper exercise of judicial discretion.[17]
§  In Patna High Court case where the plaintiff had unnecessarily prolonged the litigation declined to aware mesne profit up to the date of the decree[18]
§  While calculating mesne profit payment of revenue and cesses made by the defendant should be deducted ; The cost of collecting the rent or profits must not be allowed to the defendant unless he has entered the property in exercise of his bonafide claim of right[19]

·         Commencement and time limitation for calculation:
§  The defendant cannot be made liable for a period prior to him  actually taking possession of the property and after he has been dispossessed of the same[20].
§  Where the decree of mesne profit has been passed but  is silent  as to the period up to which such profit is to be calculated. Then the decree holder is entitled to mesne profit up to the date of delivery of possession[21], [22] or as till the moment the judgement debtor has relinquished his right over the property and a  notice in the same regard has been given to the decree holder through the court[23].
§  Note: Mesne profit cannot be recovered for more than three years from the date of decree unless both parties agree to it[24] [25].


·         Miscellaneous:
§  Court fee:1
                                                                      I.            Suit for recovery of immovable property and for mesne profit on it:
o   The court fee must be paid before ordering the execution of the decree by the court.[26](Such an order must be treated as an order under S.27 of the code.)
                                                                   II.            In case of an appeal is made in High court then the rule as in Schedule II of the Court- fees Act 1870 shall apply.
§  Appeal:
o   Order of lower court appointing a commissioner for ascertaining future mesne profit under r 12 is not appealable.
o   However the order determining  the mesne profit will be open to appeal as a final decree.


[1] Phiraya Lal alias Piara lal v. Jia Rani, AIR 1973 Del 186.
[2] Gopaldas Khetry v. Phulchand Purshottaamdas AIR 1946.
[3] O.20, R.12 (2) of Code of Civil Procedure (1908).
[4] Nataraja Achari v. Balambal Ammal, AIR1980Mad222.
[5] Ramcharain v. Bansidhar, AIR 1942.
[6] Kumarswamy v. Rudraradhya, AIR 1966 Mys 215.
[7] Somulu v. Appala Naidu, AIR 1958 AP 507.
[8] Basavayya v. Guravayya,AIR 1951 Mad 998.
[9] Mohd Amin v. Vakil Ahmed, AIR 1952 SC 358.
[10] Girish Chunder v. Shashi Shikareshwar Roy (1900) ILR 27 Cal 951.
[11] Subba v. Krishnammachari, AIR 1922 Mad 112 (1922).
[12] Girish Chunder v. Shashi Shikareshwar Roy (1900) ILR 27 Cal 951.
[13] Fakharuddin v. Official Trustee, (1882) ILR 8 Cal 178.
[14] O.20, R.12 (1)(c)(i) of Code of Civil Procedure (1908).
[15]  Gray v. Bhagumian, AIR 1930 PC 82.
[16] Raj Mal v. Prem Narain, AIR 2005 Raj 129.
[17] Girish Chunder v. Soshi (1900) ILR 27 Cal 951.
[18] Srinath v. Kali Bhavani Prasad AIR 1972 Pat 138.
[19] Dungar v.Jai Ram (1902) ILR 24.
[20] Abbas v. Fassih-ud-din, (1897) ILR 24 Cal 413.
[21] Fakharuddin v. Official Trustee, (1882) ILR 8 Cal 178.
[22] O.20, R.12 (1)(c)(i) of Code of Civil Procedure (1908)
[23] O.20, R.12 (1)(c)(ii) of Code of Civil Procedure (1908)
[24] Krishnan v. Kaandan Velu, AIR 1955 TC 233.
[25] O.20, R.12 (1)(c)(iii) of Code of Civil Procedure (1908)
[26] Chikka Kempakka v. Matchappa, (1957) Mys 405

No comments:

Post a Comment