Partly allowed

M/S Gtl Infrastructure Ltd. v. Vijay K Kohli

Delhi HC16 Dec 2024RFA/890/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant sought to withdraw an appeal against a decree for recovery of possession and mesne profits. The Court allowed withdrawal but stayed the operation of the impugned decree until 16.03.2025, directing that if the property is not vacated by then, the respondent may execute the decree. Fresh lease negotiations would not prevent vacation.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of appeal allowed; operation of impugned decree stayed until 16.03.2025.

M/S Gtl Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Vijay K Kohli — Landlord and Tenant | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~65

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

RFA 890/2024 M/S GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr. Swetank Shantanu, Advocate versus VIJAY K KOHLI .....Respondent Through: None

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶5

O R D E R % 16.12.2024 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

¶6

RFA 890/2024, CM APPL. 73660/2024 (exemption from filing complete Trial Court Record), CM APPL. 73658/2024 (condonation of delay of 54 days in filing), CM APPL. 73661/2024 (condonation of delay of 24 days in re-filing) & CM APPL. 73659/2024 (stay)

¶7

The appellant has assailed judgment and decree for recovery of possession of the immovable property with arrears of rent/mesne profits. The right to file written statement was closed, but that order was not challenged. Even as regards condonation of delay in filing the appeal, prima facie there is no satisfactory explanation of delay.

¶8

After addressing partly, learned counsel seeks passover to obtain instructions of his client.

¶9

Be awaited.

¶10

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶11

DECEMBER 16, 2024/as

¶12

In this second call, learned counsel for appellant has appeared with clear instructions of his client. Learned counsel for appellant on instructions

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 05:19:06

¶14

of appellant seeks permission to withdraw this appeal with the request to be protected from execution of the impugned decree for a period of three months from today. Learned counsel for appellant also submits that there is a possibility that the parties may enter into fresh lease transaction, though that shall not be in continuation of the tenancy already terminated leading to the present case.

¶15

Considering the above circumstances, as requested by learned counsel for appellant, the appeal and the accompanying applications are dismissed as withdrawn with the direction that operation of the impugned judgment and decree shall remain stayed till 16.03.2025 but if the subject property is not vacated by that day, the respondent shall be at liberty to seek execution of the impugned decree. It is also made clear that even if the parties arrive at fresh agreement of tenancy, the same shall not be a ground for the appellant not to vacate the subject property by 16.03.2025.

¶16

A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court.

¶17

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶18

DECEMBER 16, 2024/ rk Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶19

M/S Gtl Infrastructure Ltd. v. Vijay K Kohli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Gtl Infrastructure Ltd. v. Vijay K Kohli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Narain (Deceased) through Lrs & Ors. Vs Mera Baba Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Naresh Kumar Vs Neeraj Thakur

M/S Gyan Sales Corporation Vs Rajendra Prasad

Mohit Virmani & Anr. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

M/S Emsons Radio Corporation Vs the Controlloing Authority & Anr.

Yama Merajuddin Vs Usha Rathi & Anr.