Settlement reached in eviction proceedings. Petitioner to pay Rs. 15,000 to vacate; locks to be broken; mutual withdrawal of pending cases agreed.
Petitioner to pay additional Rs. 15,000 to respondent by the specified date to vacate premises.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~51
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DHIRAJ KUMAR NIRBHAY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anshul Grover and Mr. Pawan Madhukar, Advocates with Petitioner in person.
Versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for State with SI Ramchandra, P.S. Maurice Nagar. Mr. Atul Bhuchar, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 and 4 with Respondents in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
O R D E R
% 07.08.2018
On 25.07.2018, the petitioner was directed to vacate the premises occupied by him by 5th of August. It is his case that the said premises had been locked by the landlady on 01.08.2018, therefore, he was unable to vacate the same.
In view of the above, the locks, as may be, shall be broken open in the presence of the parties and the police on 08.08.2018 at 12 noon. Whatever the belongings of the petitioner inside the premises, shall be removed by him by 4.00 p.m and the premises shall be vacated by him.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a sum of Rs.23,000/- has already been deposited in favour of the respondent/landlady towards occupation charges for some time of the premises. The release of the same shall be facilitated by the petitioner when an application for the
same is moved by the landlady before the Trial Court concerned.
Mr. Bhuchar, the learned counsel for respondents No. 3 and 4 submits that although the outstanding amount towards rent is over Rs.76,000/- (less Rs. 23,500/- i.e. more than Rs.52,000/-), nevertheless, in view of the precipitate relief of getting rid of a difficult occupant from her premises, the landlady is ready and willing to settle all her dues at Rs.15,000/-, in addition to the aforesaid amount of Rs.23,000/-, which is lying deposited, and would enure to her exclusive benefit.
In view of the above, the petitioner shall pay an additional amount of Rs.15,000/- to the respondent-landlady by 4.00 pm tomorrow in the presence of the police officer.
The petition stands disposed-off in the above terms.
Since the lis stands settled between the parties, it is also agreed between them, that they shall withdraw all cases, as may be pending, against each other.
An affidavit of compliance shall be filed by the petitioner within two weeks.
A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties, under signature of the Court Master.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
AUGUST 07, 2018 sb
DHIRAJ KUMAR NIRBHAY
STATE & ORS.
NAJMI WAZIRI
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
