Dismissed

Rajender Kumar v. Rahul Sethi & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Sept 2013CR/5719/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision against eviction judgments, the tenant voluntarily withdrew the challenge. The High Court granted four months for shift of inventory, conditional upon clearing rent arrears and undertaking to vacate premises by January 31, 2014.

What did the court decide?

Granted four months time (from October 1, 2013) to vacate premises upon clearing arrears and undertaking to vacate by January 31, 2014.

Rajender Kumar Vs Rahul Sethi & Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar 2013.10.03 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

#1#

¶3

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 and C.R. No.5719 of 2013

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 and C.R. No.5719 of 2013

¶6

Date of Decision: 27.9.2013

Rajender Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Rahul Sethi and Ors.

....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶13

Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the petitioner-tenant.

¶14

Mr. Tribhawan Dahiya, Advocate for the respondentslandlord.

¶15

JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)

¶16

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013

¶17

Application is allowed.

¶18

Affidavit dated 26.9.2013 sworn by respondent No.1 is taken

¶19

on record.

¶20

C.R. No.5719 of 2013

¶21

Petitioner-tenant is in revision aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Authorities below whereby whereby he has been evicted from the demised shop comprising a portion of residential premises on the ground of personal necessity of the landlord for construction/expansion of his office by the learned Rent Controller, Faridabad vide judgment dated 9.5.2013 and the findings thereof affirmed

¶22

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 and C.R. No.5719 of 2013

¶23

#2#

¶24

in appeal by the learned Appellate Authority, Faridabad vide judgment dated 16.8.2013.

¶25

Notice in the present revision was issued on the assertion of the tenant that two adjoining shops, which would form the part of the Office Complex including the present demised premises, are not being got vacated by the landlord.

¶26

In response, the landlord has filed an application dated 26.9.2013 by way of application bearing C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 asserting that the vacant possession of the said two adjoining shops has already been handed over to the landlord by the tenants of those shops.

¶27

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant, realizing that this Court is not inclined to interfere on merits, on instructions from his client, submits that he would not press this petition but in view of the fact that the petitioner has been tenant with the demised premises since 1987, he prays for four months' time to vacate the premises in order to shift his inventory.

¶28

Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord has very graciously agreed to the grant of 4 months' time subject to the tenant clearing the arrears of rent at the pre-determined rate, if any.

¶29

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as not pressed, however, four months time commencing with effect from 1.10.2013 is granted to the petitioner-tenant for making alternative arrangement subject to his furnishing an undertaking on or before 25.10.2013 to the Court of learned Rent Controller, Faridabad that he shall hand over actual physical vacant possession of the demised premises to the

¶30

#3#

¶31

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 and C.R. No.5719 of 2013

¶32

respondent-landlord by 31.1.2014. The undertaking shall also state that the entire arrears of rent, if any, at the already determined rate have been deposited in the Court of learned Rent Controller by 25.10.2013 and the respondent shall continue to pay the rent in advance by 7^th of each calendar month. Needless to say that any violation of the terms shall entitle the landlord to seek his eviction forthwith with police help, if necessary without recourse to any other remedy besides the petitioner-tenant making himself liable in contempt proceeding.

¶33

September 27, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE

¶34

C.M.No.19745-CII of 2013 and #4# C.R. No.5719 of 2013

Rajender Kumar v. Rahul Sethi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajender Kumar v. Rahul Sethi & Ors.

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

(O&M) Dewan Singh Vs Satish Kumar etc.

Dewan Singh Vs Satish Kumar etc.

Gurugobind Singh Ecuational & Charitable Trust Vs Punjab Regional Chapter

Rajiv Batra Vs Davinder & Ors.

Monika Vs Hari Dass

Anudeep and Anr. Vs Dera Baba Bhuman Shah and Ors.