Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is to the order dated 10.2.2012, whereby Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.3, Ajmer allowed the application filed by the appellant -petitioner under Order 41 Rule 5 CPC and stayed the execution of the judgment and decree passed by the trial court subject to the condition that the appellant -petitioner shall either pay the mesne profit @ Rs. 3000/ - per month to the plaintiff -respondent or deposit the same in the trial court. Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that the suit property belongs to Cantonment Board. He further canvassed that mesne -profit of Rs. 3000/ -, as determined by the appellate court, is abysmally high as compared to the rent of adjacent premises, hence the impugned order be modified and the amount of mesne -profit be reduced substantially.
(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the appellate court determined the mesne -profit keeping in mind the galloping price hike of the properties in the recent times. The learned appellate court is also found to have taken into consideration the rent of the premises adjacent to the suit property and the valuer's report and that the suit premises is situated in the heart of Nasirabad, from where the commercial activities are conducted. The findings arrived at by the learned appellate court are found to be just and apposite, with which 1 fully concur.
(3.) I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, e contra, the writ petition is found to be sans any substance.;