Disposed

Madan Lal v. Mathura Lal

Rajasthan HC6 Dec 2017CSA/165/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The second appeal filed by tenants in a suit for eviction due to default of rent and hostels necessity was disposed of by granting extra time to vacate the premises on or before 01.11.2018, subject to compliance with specific undertakings and payment of mesne profit.

What did the court decide?

Appellants allowed time to vacate on or before 01.11.2018 subject to undertaking, payment of mesne profit, and adherence to specific conditions; appeal closed.

Madan Lal Vs Mathura Lal — Execution and Attachment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 165 / 1998

¶3

Madan Lal S/o Kishan Lal (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Representatives:- , Since deceased through legal representatives-

¶4

1/1. Govind Lal S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶5

1/2. Prem Chand S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶6

1/3. Shyam Kumar S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶7

1/4. Jagdish S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶8

1/5. Raju S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶9

1/6. Bhawani Shankar S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶10

1/7. Vimla Bai D/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶11

1/8. Manju Bai D/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶12

1/9. Prabhu Chauhan S/o Late Shri Madan Lal B/c Khateek (Chauhan), Talab Pada, Baran, Teh. & Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶13

----Defendants/Appellants

¶14

Versus

¶15

Mathura Lal S/o Kishanlal B/c Yadav (Jatav) (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Heirs:- , Since deceased through legal representatives-

¶16

1/1. Smt. Kamla Bai W/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Deendayal Park, Baran, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶17

1/2. Nemichand S/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Deendayal Park, Baran, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶18

1/3. Chameli Bai W/o Ramesh Chand D/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Lanka Colony, Baran, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶19

1/4. Ramkanya Bai W/o Kuldeep Singh D/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Infront of Paulnikas, Near Sabzi Mandi, Chhawani Kota, Distt. Kota (Raj.)

¶20

(2 of 4)

¶21

[CSA-165/1998]

¶22

1/5. Vidya Devi W/o Bajrang Lal D/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Jagjeevan Ram Colony, Baran, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶23

1/6. Urmila Yadav W/o Jagdish Yadav D/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Near Sahabad Darwaja, Barana, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶24

1/7. Lalita Rani W/o Rajesh D/o Late Shri Mathuralal, Lanka Colony, Baran, Teh. and Distt. Baran (Raj.)

¶25

----Plaintiffs/Respondents

¶26

Mr. Rajneesh Gupta for the appellants/defendants Mr. J.K. Yadav for the respondents/defendants

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR Judgment

¶28

06/12/2017

¶29

The appellants/defendants (‘the appellants’ for short) have preferred the instant second appeal aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree dated 02.04.1997 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Division) & Judicial Magistrate, Baran (‘the trial court’ for short) in civil suit No. 02/1995 which has been affirmed vide Judgment and Decree dated 31.03.1998 passed by learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Baran (‘the learned first appellate court’) in civil appeal No. 11/1997, by which the suit of the plaintiffs/respondents (‘the respondent’ for short) filed in default of payment of rent and personal bonafide necessity has been decreed.

¶30

Learned counsel for the appellants upon instructions submits that the appellants are not pressing the appeal on merits and craving that a reasonable time may be granted to them to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of the property in question.

¶31

Learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) has very candidly accepted the proposal of learned counsel for the appellants to allow some time to the appellants for vacating the suit premises. After

¶32

(3 of 4)

¶33

[CSA-165/1998]

¶34

thorough deliberations, learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) has agreed to allow a reasonable time to the appellants to vacate the premises preferably on or before 01.11.2018 with the mesne profit as determined by the learned courts below in its judgment and decree.

¶35

The aforesaid reasonable period to vacate the premises as well as mesne profit as determined by the learned courts below in its judgment and decree is accepted by learned counsel for the appellants without any demure.

¶36

Accordingly, the present second appeal of the appellants is closed with a direction to the appellants to submit an undertaking to the effect that they will hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises to the respondents-landlord on or before 01/11/2018 with the following conditions:

¶37

(i) The appellants shall submit an undertaking and shall hand-over the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property in dispute to the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) on or before 01/11/2018 and shall not cause any damage to the rented property and shall maintain the same as it is. The respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) shall not execute the impugned decree till 01.11.2018.

¶38

(ii) The appellants shall pay the mesne profit as determined by the learned courts below in its judgment and decree. and will further continue to pay mesne profit every month by 15^th day of the next succeeding month or in advance to the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) uptil vacant possession is handed over to the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord). The arrears of rent and mesne profit as determined by the Courts below, if not already deposited/paid, shall also be deposited/paid by the appellants in the Bank Account of plaintiff-Nemi Chand bearing No.0073000100102327 of Punjab National Bank, Baran, within a period of three months from today and

¶39

(4 of 4)

¶40

[CSA-165/1998]

¶41

entire amount including the amount already deposited on this account will be disbursed to the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord).

¶42

(iii) The appellants shall further undertake that they would not sub-let, assign or part with the possession of the suit premises or any part thereof in favour of anyone else and would not create any third party interest in the same during the aforesaid period else the same will be treated as void.

¶43

(iv) The appellants shall furnish a written undertaking incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the trial Court by 18/01/2018 and one copy thereof along with affidavit in this Court.

¶44

(v). It is made clear that in case, the appellants do not comply with any of the aforesaid conditions, then it will be open for the respondents/plaintiffs (landlord) to get the decree passed in their favour executed forthwith even before the aforesaid date i.e. 01/11/2018 and the respondentlandlord may also initiate contempt proceedings in this Court against the appellants.

¶45

With the aforesaid terms, conditions and directions, the present second appeal of the appellants is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.

¶46

A copy of this judgment be sent to the parties concerned and the learned Court below forthwith.

¶47

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J.

¶48

Sharma NK

Madan Lal v. Mathura Lal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Lal v. Mathura Lal

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

Omprakash Vs Manohar Lal Kaloya and Ors.

State of Rajasthan Vs Surendra Singh Sindhu and Ors.

State of Rajasthan Vs Surendra Singh Sindhu

Nirmal Singh Gurjar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Smt Rajesh Gautam and Anr. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Surendra Singh@Chhinder Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp