Disposed

Jai Bhagwan v. Ashok Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Sept 2024CR/535/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tenant's revision against concurrent ejectment orders; counsel sought one year to vacate. Court declined but, with consent, allowed vacation by 31.03.2025 subject to continued rent payment and mesne profits of ₹50,000 per month thereafter if possession not delivered.

What did the court decide?

Time till 31.03.2025 to vacate, subject to rent payment; ₹50,000/month user charges thereafter if not vacated.

Jai Bhagwan Vs Ashok Kumar — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

¶3

110

¶4

CR-535-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision.:23.09.2024

Jai Bhagwan

Pe//oner

Vs.

Ashok Kumar Respondent

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶10

Present: Mr. Ravi Du� Sharma, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶11

Mr. Tejas Bansal, Advocate for Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent.

¶12

¶13

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

This is tenant’s pe��on against the concurrent findings of the Courts below inasmuch as ejectment pe��on filed by the landlord (respondent herein) was allowed by Ld. Rent Controller wayback on 31.03.2017 and said order has been upheld by the Appellate Authority by way of the order dated 06.12.2017.

¶15

Instead of addressing arguments on merits, learned counsel for the pe��oner (tenant) at the outset has prayed for gran�ng reasonable �me so as to vacate the premises. He has prayed for a period of one year so as to vacate the premises.

¶16

The said request is declined considering the fact that order of the ejectment was passed wayback in March, 2017 and upheld in December, 2017. This appeal is already pending before this Court for more than 06 years.

¶17

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.09.23 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CR-535-2018 (O&M)

¶19

-2-

¶20

With the consent of both the sides, it is directed that pe��oner (tenant herein) shall vacate the demised premises on or before 31.03.2025. This is subject to the condi�on that pe��oner shall con�nue to pay the rent to the respondent- landlord as per the last agreed rent. In case, pe��oner fails to vacate the premises upto 31.03.2025 and the landlord (respondent herein) is compelled to file the execu�on, then the pe��oner will be liable to pay user charges/mesne profits @ ₹50,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.04.2025, �ll the actual possession is delivered to the landlord.

¶21

Disposed of.

¶22

( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶23

September 23, 2024

¶24

Nee�ka Tuteja

¶25

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶26

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.09.23 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jai Bhagwan v. Ashok Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Bhagwan v. Ashok Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

(O&M) Makhan and Others Vs Smt. Biban and Another

Mukhtiar Singh Vs Lakhbir Singh @ Lucky & Ors.

Bachittar Singh and Ors. Vs Maya Devi (Deceased) and Ors.

Jasbir Singh Vs Baldev Singh

Shhinder Kaur and Others Vs Gurtej Singh and Others

Satish Kumar Soni through His Lrs Vs Dimpy Malhotra and Anr.