Tenant appeals from an amended final judgment of the Civil Court, New York County, entered December 12, 2002, after a nonjury trial (Carol R. Edmead, J.) which awarded landlord a money judgment of $388,511.63 in a nonpayment summary proceeding.

PER CURIAM:

Amended final judgment entered December 12, 2002 (Carol R. Edmead, J.) affirmed, with $25 costs.There is no basis to disturb Civil Court's resolution of the issues of fact and credibility since the determination represents a fair and reasonable interpretation of the record evidence (see Thoreson v Penthouse International, Ltd., 80 NY2d 490 [1992]). Specifically, the court determined that the clause in the renewal lease conditioning rent [*2]increases to be paid by tenant after "substantial completion" of certain renovation work, was intended by the parties to relate only to the increases between 1992 and March 23, 1995. The renewal lease contained certain other remedies that tenant could avail itself of in the event "substantial completion" was not effected by landlord, including a per diem rent credit. The language in paragraph 3 of the renewal lease supports the landlord's position that the parties contemplated that the "substantial completion" term would not apply after March 23, 1995. Since paragraph 3 is ambiguous with respect to when increases in rent are to be paid by the tenant, the court properly permitted parol evidence to explain the intention of the parties (see Blue Jeans U.S.A. Inc. v Basciano, 286 AD2d 274, 276 [2001]).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
I concur.
I concur.
I concur.
Decision Date: December 03, 2004