Second appeal over possession of tenanted premises was settled: appellant agreed to vacate by 30.04.2025 against waiver of dues beyond deposited damages, not to challenge the decree below. The court recorded the compromise and disposed of the appeal.
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.
$~46
MUKESH BHATT .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Jatin Tyagi, Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advs.
versus
DADA DEV MANDIR PRBANDAK SABHA .....Respondent Through: Mr. S.C. Singhal, Ms. Ramika Munjal, Mr. Saideep Kaushik, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
O R D E R % 05.03.2025
RSA 152/2022 & CM APPL. 13247/2025
The present application has been filed under Order 23 Rule 3 and Section 151 CPC for recording the compromise.
Both the learned counsels submits that the appellant has arranged for an alternate accommodation and almost shifted to the new accommodation and as such does not want to proceed with the present appeal. The appellant has agreed to not challenge the impugned decree passed by Ld. Additional District Judge-02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in RCA Civil ADJ No. 138/2019 titled Mukesh Bhatt vs. Dada Dev Mandir Prabhandak Sabha (Barah Gaon).
Learned counsel for the appellant submits on instructions that since the business conducted related the Indane LPG Gas, appellant is required to
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 10/03/2025 at 12:25:33
inform properly, to all its customers of the new address and for that purpose, appellant is required to maintain the present office for a period of about 02 months and as such undertake to handover physical vacant possession to the respondent on or before 30.04.2025. It has further been stated in the application that the appellant has already deposited a sum of Rs.2,44,400/towards damages/use and occupation charges in the Court of Additional District Judge-02, South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi and undertaken to clear electricity and other charges. The respondent has agreed to waive off all charges beyond the amount so deposited (Rs. 2,44,400/-) upto the date of handing over the possession by the appellant i.e. 30.04.2025.
It has been agreed that the respondent will withdraw this amount from the Ld. Trial Court. The application is duly accompanied with an affidavit. The settlement as mentioned in the application filed under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC dated 19.02.2025 duly signed by the appellant and accompanied with an affidavit is accepted. Both the parties are held bound by the settlement.
In view of the submissions, the present appeal along with pending application stands disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
MARCH 5, 2025/AR/KR/vm..
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 10/03/2025 at 12:25:33
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the compromise settlement between the parties should be recorded under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC and the appeal disposed of.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukesh Bhatt
Dada Dev Mandir Prbandak Sabha
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
