A. K. SIKRI, J. ( 1 ) PLAINTIFF company claims to be the owner of property No. 27, Community Centre, saket, New Delhi-110017. Entire ground floor (excluding one large toilet on the ground floor) and the first floor portion of this property was given on lease to the defendant. The total area given on lease admeasures 2475 sq. ft. (hereinafter referred to as the demised Premises ). The lease agreement dated 12th July 2001 was executed between the parties incorporating terms and conditions of grant of lease therein. As per the said agreement, the lease was for a total period of 9 years comprising of three terms of three years each. The first three years period was the lock-in-period and thereafter the lease was renewable at the option of the defendant-lessee for two terms of three years each. The lease commenced with effect from 1. 8. 2001. The agreement further provided that every renewal shall carry 20% increase in monthly rent over the last paid rent. The defendant-lessee was to pay a monthly rent of rs. 1,90,000/- apart from the maintenance and other charges payable in respect of the demised premises. The monthly rent was payable in advance by the 7th day of each english calendar month. The delayed payment of rent carried interest @ 18% per annum. ( 2 ) THE submission of the plaintiff is that as per the terms of the said lease deed and the letter agreed upon between the parties thereto, the lessee (defendant herein) was to take all steps to get the said lease deed registered and was also to bear all the expenses, including stamp duty payable therefore. However, the defendant kept on dilly-dallying dilly the same and did not get the said lease deed registered. As per the settled legal position in this regard, the lease in question is, therefore, on month to month basis. Plaintiff further states that the defendant had been highly irregular in payment of rent payable in respect of the demised premises. As on date, the defendant is in default and arrears of monthly rent for the period up to 31st July 2004 to the tune of Rs. 4,08,400/ -. Despite repeated reminders and notices in this regard, the defendant has failed and neglected to pay the said outstanding amount. As on date, the defendant is in default and arrears of monthly rent for the period up to 31st July 2004 to the tune of Rs. 4,08,400/ -. Despite repeated reminders and notices in this regard, the defendant has failed and neglected to pay the said outstanding amount. In addition thereto, owing to above defaults on the part of the defendant and having regard to the contractual stipulations between the parties hereto, the defendant is further liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum on the outstanding/arrears of rent. ( 3 ) THE defendant had in the month of november 2003 vide its letter dated 22. 1. 2003 asked the plaintiff for reduction in the monthly rent in respect of the demised premises. The request of the defendant was, however, declined by the plaintiff vide its reply-letter dated 10. 12. 2003 and the defendant was clearly informed that it was not possible for the plaintiff to change the terms of the lease. In May, 2004 the defendant vide its letter dated 11. 5. 2004, again requested the plaintiff for reduction in monthly lease rent or for deferment of increase in the monthly rent which was scheduled to be increased by 20% to Rs. 2,28,000/.- per month with effect from 1. 8. 2004. The said letter dated 11. 5. 2004 of the defendant was replied by the plaintiff on 19. 5. 2004 again informing the defendant that the plaintiff was not agreeable either for reduction in the rent or for deferring the increase of rent payable. The plaintiff further informed that it may, however, consider the defendant s proposal at the time of renewal of lease. ( 4 ) IT is further stated that three years lease term expired on July 31, -2004. The defendant was required to exercise its option for renewal of lease for the next three years term. The defendant, however, did not do so. On and with effect from 1st August, 2004, the use, occupation and possession of the demised premises became illegal and unauthorized. The defendant was also in default and arrears of rent for a substantial amount as on July 31, 2004 which had accumulated to Rs. 9,08,400/- as on the said date plus interest thereon for the period of default/delay. The defendant did not clear the outstanding/arrears of rent. It did not seek the renewal of lease deed. The defendant was also in default and arrears of rent for a substantial amount as on July 31, 2004 which had accumulated to Rs. 9,08,400/- as on the said date plus interest thereon for the period of default/delay. The defendant did not clear the outstanding/arrears of rent. It did not seek the renewal of lease deed. It also did not vacate the demised premises and continued to use and occupy the same. No consensus could be arrived at between the parties in this regard. The plaintiff under the circumstances issued a statutory notice dated August 17, 2004 calling upon the defendant to quit and vacate the premises and to hand over and deliver the peaceful and vacant possession of the demised premises. The defendant was also informed that it was in illegal and unauthorised use, occupation and possession of the demised premises with effect from august 1, 2004, for which the plaintiff would hold the defendant liable for damages on and with effect from August 1, 2004; The defendant, however, mala fide and dishonestly avoided the said notice and the same was received back undelivered. ( 5 ) SINCE the premises were not vacated nor outstanding/arrears of rent paid, another notice dated 30th September -2004 was issued. The defendant, however, did not come forward for execution and registration of fresh lease deed and also did not vacate the demised premises. In the interregnum, two cheques bearing No. 009474 dated 14th september 2004 and No. 087302 dated 8th october 2004 for Rs. 1,00,000/- each were issued by the defendant. The plaintiff, vide another notice dated 30th November 2004, received the said two cheques as part payment in part discharge of the defendant s liability towards the arrears of rent for the period upto 31st July 2004. The plaintiff accepted the said cheques without prejudice to its notice dated 17th August 2004 and 30th September 2004. Vide its aforesaid notice dated 30th November 2004, the plaintiff also responded to the defendant s reply dated 13th October 2004 and again informed the defendant that in case it was inclined to continue with the lease of the demised premises the monthly rent in respect thereof would be Rs. 2,28,000/- with effect from 1st august 2004 as agreed under the lease deed. ( 6 ) IN the interregnum, two further cheques bearing Nos. 2,28,000/- with effect from 1st august 2004 as agreed under the lease deed. ( 6 ) IN the interregnum, two further cheques bearing Nos. 087338 and 087358 dated 11th november 2004 and 7th December 2004 respectively for Rs. 1,00,000/- each were issued by the defendant which were received by the plaintiff as on account payment in part discharge of the defendant s liability towards the plaintiff for arrears of rent with interest thereon as on 31st July 2004. The defendant was accordingly notified by the plaintiff vide its yet another notice dated 5th january 2005. Vide the said notice dated 5th january 2005, it was also informed that the defendant was in default in arrears for payment of damages at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per day with effect from 1st August 2004 and that the arrears in respect thereof had accumulated to Rs. 15,35,000/- as on 5th january 2005. The defendant was further formed that it was in arrears of rent to the one of Rs. 4,08,400/- for the period upto 1st July 2004 and was further liable for payment of interest on delayed payment of rent and damages. As the premises were not vacated nor arrears of rent paid, the plaintiff filed the instant suit for possession as well as recovery of Rs. 27,61,936. 39p. This amount includes interest of Rs. 2,33,536. 39p. on the arrears of rent calculated @ Rs. 18% per annum till 28th February 2005. ( 7 ) DEFENDANT was duly served but nobody appeared on behalf of the defendant. Vide order dated 4th August 2005 the defendant was proceeded against ex parte and the plaintiff was permitted to lead evidence by way of affidavit. Affidavit of Sh. Rakesh Gupta, authorized signatory of the plaintiff, has been filed which is exhibit PW-1/a. He has proved resolution of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff dated 7th April 2003 authorizing him to sign and verify the present plaint and institute these proceedings as Ex. PW-1/1. In this affidavit averments made in the plaint are affirmed on oath and all necessary documents are also proved. The leasing proposal dated 14th June 2001 is proved as ex. PW-1/2. The lease agreement dated 12th july 2001 executed between the parties is proved as Ex. PW-1/3. The site plan of the area taken on lease under the said agreement is proved Ex. PW-1/4. The leasing proposal dated 14th June 2001 is proved as ex. PW-1/2. The lease agreement dated 12th july 2001 executed between the parties is proved as Ex. PW-1/3. The site plan of the area taken on lease under the said agreement is proved Ex. PW-1/4. Letter dated 22nd november 2003 vide which the defendant requested the plaintiff for reduction in the monthly rent is proved as Ex. PW-1/5. Reply dated 10th December 2003 vide which the request of the defendant was rejected is proved as Ex. PW-1/6, Similar request dated 11th May 2004 (Ex. PW-1/7) was rejected vide letter dated 19th May 2004 (Ex. PW-1/8) rejecting this request again. Statutory notice dated 17th August 2004 calling upon the defendant to quit and vacate the demised premises is proved as Ex. PW-1/9. Its postal receipt is Ex. PW-1/10 and the postal envelop received back undelivered is Ex. PW-1/11. Another notice dated 17th August 2004 calling upon the defendant to pay damages @ Rs. 10,000/- per month with effect from 1st August, 2004 for the illegal and unauthorized use and occupation of the demised premises is Ex. PW-1/12. Reply to this notice by the defendant vide its letter dated 13th October 2004 whereby again request was made to reduce the rent is Ex. PW-1/13. The defendant was served yet another notice dated 30th November 2004, which was received by the defendant on 2nd december 2004 is Ex. PW-1/14. In this notice the defendant was informed that in case it was inclined to continue with the lease of the demised premises the monthly rent in respect thereof would be Rs. 2,28,000/- with effect from 1st August 2004 as agreed under the lease deed and the defendant was called upon to convey its acceptance and come forward for execution of the fresh lease deed. The postal receipt issued by the postal authorities is Ex. PW-1/15. ( 8 ) IN the interregnum, two more cheques dated 11th November 2004 and 7th december 2004 for Rs. 1 lac each were given by the defendant which were accepted by the plantiff on account payment in part discharge of the defendant s liabillity towards the plaintiff for arrears of rent with, interest thereon as 31st July 2004. Intimation to this effect was given vide notice dated 5th January 2005 which is Ex. PW-1/16 and the postal receipt is Ex. PW-1/17. Intimation to this effect was given vide notice dated 5th January 2005 which is Ex. PW-1/16 and the postal receipt is Ex. PW-1/17. It is further averred that the defendant is in illegal and unauthorised use and occupation of the demised premises and is, therefore, liable to be evicted from the demised premises, as per the site plan annexed as Schedule A to the plaint. The mesne profits for the illegal and unauthorised use and occupation and possession of the demised premises are also claimed @ Rs. 10,000/- per day with effect from 1st August 2004. Interest @ 18% per annum thereon is also claimed and in this manner the plaintiff has computed rs. 2,33,536. 39p on account of interest. In view of the aforesaid unrebutted testimony, I hold that the defendant is in unauthorised occupation of the demised premises and has not vacated the premises in spite of valid and legal notice of termination of tenancy which was duly served on the defendant. Though the plaintiff has claimed mesne profits @ rs. 10,000/- per day with effect from 1st august 2004, having regard to the plaintiff s own letter/notice dated 30th November 2004 calling upon the defendant to agree on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,28,000/- I deem it proper to grant mesne profits @ Rs. 2,28,000/-per month with effect from 1st August 2004. The plaintiff is, thus, entitled to a decree in the following terms:-1. Decree of ejectment/possession is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant in respect of the demised premises being the entire ground floor (excluding one large toilet) and the first floor portion of the property bearing No. 27, Community Centre, saket, New Delhi-110 017 (total area admeasuring 2475 sq. ft. and is shown in the boundaries marked with red ink in the site plan attached as Schedule A to the plaint ). 2. Decree for arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 4,08,400/- upto 31st July 2004. 3. Decree of mesne profits @ rs. 2,28,000/- per month with effect from 1st August 2004 till the date the possession of the demised premises shall be handed over by the defendant to the plaintiff 4. Interest @ 9% per annum is awarded on the aforesaid amount for the period there is default/delay in making the payment. ( 9 ) PLAINTIFF shall also be entitled to costs. Decree be drawn accordingly. Interest @ 9% per annum is awarded on the aforesaid amount for the period there is default/delay in making the payment. ( 9 ) PLAINTIFF shall also be entitled to costs. Decree be drawn accordingly. The suit is disposed of. .