Disposed

M/S Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Himani Kapila & Ors.

Delhi HC17 Jan 2019CS(OS)/339/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a suit for possession, the court accepted undertaking from Defendant 1 to handover property and pay dues. The suit was disposed of on these terms, granting liberty to the plaintiff to seek appropriate remedies under Order II Rule 2 CPC.

What did the court decide?

Undertaking of Defendant 1 accepted; Suit disposed with liberty to plaintiff to approach court regarding Order II Rule 2 CPC prayers.

M/S Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mrs… — Partition | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~O-32

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

I.A. 538/2019 in

¶4

CS(OS) 339/2018

¶5

M/S INTERCONTINENTAL CONSULTANTS AND TECHNOCRATS PVT. LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr. Anish Dayal, Ms. Mansi Sharma, Mr. Rupam Sharma and Mr. A. Ganguly, Advs.

¶6

versus MRS. HIMANI KAPILA & ORS. ..... Defendants Through : Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. K.K. Malhotra, Adv. for D-1 along with D-1. Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee and Ms. Shreya Singhal, Advs. for D-2. Mr. V. Hari Pillai and Mr. Manish Kumar Saryal, Advs. for D-3.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

¶8

¶9

O R D E R 17.01.2019

¶10

Defendant no.1, present in Court along with her counsel, undertakes to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of the entire suit property bearing No.A-1, West End Colony, New Delhi – 110021 to defendant no.3 on or before 15^th March, 2019. Defendant no.1 further undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to defendant no.3 within one week and Rs.2,00,000/within four weeks. Defendant no.1 further undertakes to clear the entire outstanding of the electricity and water charges up to 15^th March, 2019.

¶11

The undertaking of defendant no.1 is accepted by this Court.

¶12

Learned counsel for defendant no.2, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, submits that defendant no.2 shall pay Rs.1,50,000/- to defendant no.3 within one week and Rs.1,50,000/- within four weeks.

¶13

Statement of learned counsel for defendant no.2 is taken on record. Defendant no.2 shall remain bound by the statement made by his counsel. 5. Learned counsel for defendant no.3, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, agrees not to execute the decree for possession in respect of the suit property till 15^th March, 2019.

¶14

Learned counsel for defendant no.3 submits that she may be permitted to show the suit property to the prospective tenant. 7. Defendant no.1 is directed to permit the defendant no.3 to show the suit property to prospective tenants. However, defendant no.3 shall give advance written notice to defendant no.1 and shall visit the suit property subject to the convenience of the defendant no.1

¶15

Defendant No.1 shall remain bound by the undertaking given to this Court. In the event of failure of defendant no.1 to honour her undertaking, she shall be liable for the consequences of violation of undertaking. 9. Learned counsel for the plaintiff does not press this suit in view of the undertaking of defendant no.1 and seeks liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies with respect to the prayers made in application under Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶16

The suit is disposed of in terms of the undertaking of defendant no.1 with liberty to the plaintiff as prayed for.

¶17

Defendant no.1 shall sign the copy of this order sheet before leaving the court.

¶18

This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by learned counsels for all the parties.

¶19

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties under the signature of the Court Master.

¶20

J.R. MIDHA, J.

¶21

JANUARY 17, 2019 mk

M/S Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Himani Kapila & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Himani Kapila & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Devender Kumar Vs Shri Brijesh & Anr.

Shri Varun Pawha Vs Smt Sudesh Pawha & Ors.

Shri Sukh Sagar Sahni & Others Vs Shri Salil Sagar Sahni

M/S Lighthouse Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vijay Kumar Sharma & Anr.

Shri Iqbal Singh Ahluwalia Vs Shri Sudarshan Singh Ahluwalia

Ram Baboo Jain and Ors. Vs Vipin Kumar Jain and Ors.

M/S Megahertz Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Lilliput Kidswear Ltd. and Others

M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs Arihant Credit Capital Market Ltd.

M/S Platinum Engineers Vs Union of India & Ors.

Rotarian Dk Sharma Vs Rotary International & Ors.

Shakuntala Devi Educational Society Vs Mohammed Shahid Chaudhary

Ajay Shankar Arora & Ors. Vs Bharat Arora & Ors.

M/S Protonics Systems(India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Bharti Electronics & Ors.

Volano Entertainment Private Limited Vs Anjana Bora Jain