Disposed

Vinay Kumar Verma and Anr. v. Dinesh Kotewala

Rajasthan HC4 Aug 2017CW/10497/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tenants agreed to vacate premises by July 31, 2018. Landlord accepted this proposal. Writ petition disposed with directions to pay rent/arrears and submit undertaking to Rent Tribunal within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Tenants granted leave to occupy premises till July 31, 2018; ordered to pay arrears and mesne profits; directed to submit undertaking to Rent Tribunal within 30 days.

Vinay Kumar Verma and Anr. Vs Dinesh Kotewala — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶2

AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶3

ORDER

¶4

(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10497/2017)

¶5

1- fou; dqekj oekZ iq= Lo Jh osnizdk”k “kekZ] vk;q 35 o’kZ

¶6

2- fot; dqekj oekZ iq= Lo Jh osnizdk”k “kekZ] vk;q 33 o’kZ

¶7

fofo/k izfrfuf/k osnizdk”k oekZ iq= Jh cynso flag nRrd iq= gqdepan oekZ ¼e`rd nkSjku vthZ½

¶8

fuoklhx.k&2008] /kkHkkbZ th dk [kqjkZ] jkeaxt cktkj] pkSdMh jkepUæth] t;iqj

¶9

&&&;kfpdkdrkZx.k@vihykFkhZ@xSjvthZnkj

¶10

cuke

¶11

fnus”k dksVsokyk iq= Lo Jh nsodhuUnu dksVsokyk] fuoklh&edku uacj 362] fo”os”ojth] t;iqj

¶12

&&&foi{kh@izR;FkhZ@vthZnkj

Date of Order:

August 04, 2017.

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶17

Mr. Kartar Singh ] for the Petitioners-tenants.

¶18

Mr. Santosh Saini]

¶19

Mr. M.C. Jain, for the respondent-landlord.

¶20

BY THE COURT :

¶21

After arguing the matter at some length, the learned counsel for the petitioners-

¶22

tenants submits on instruction of his clients that the petitioners-tenants shall vacate

¶23

the tenanted premises on or before July 31, 2018, during which period the petitioners-

¶24

tenants would make arrangements for an alternative premises to run their business

¶25

therefrom.

¶26

Mr. M.C. Jain, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent-landlord, with instruction from his clients agreed to the proposal of learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant and submits that in the event of the judgment and decree of the Appellate Rent Tribunal Jaipur Metropolitan city, Jaipur dated 16-3-2017 were to be upheld, the respondent landlord would have no objection with the petitioners-tenants continuing in occupation of the tenanted premises in question only till July 31, 2018 and in no event beyond the said date.

¶27

In view of the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶28

(i) The petitioner-tenant shall be entitled to continue in occupation of the tenanted premises in question upto July 31, 2018, but not beyond subject to condition that they would hand over the vacant possession of the premises in question to respondent-landlord on or before July 31, 2018.

¶29

(ii) The petitioners-tenants shall pay arrears of rent or mesne profits, if any, till July 31, 2017, as determined by the courts within a period of two months from today.

¶30

(iv) The petitioners-tenants commencing 1st August, 2017 shall pay to respondent-landlord, mesne profits @ Rs.1000/- per month on or before 10 th of each month.

¶31

(v) The petitioners-tenants shall not alienate or otherwise create third party right, or hand over possession of the tenanted premises in question to any other person.

¶32

Further, the petitioners-tenants shall submit an undertaking incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the Rent Tribunal Jaipur Metropolitan city Jaipur, within a period of thirty days, from the date of this order. In case the petitioners-tenants fail to submit the undertaking as aforesaid within thirty days from today, and/ or breaches the conditions of this order, the respondent-landlord shall be entitled to the immediate execution of the judgment and possession certificate dated 16-3-2017 and obtain possession of the premises in issue forthwith in accordance with law. The breach of this order shall also be liable to be punished as contempt of the court.

¶33

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(Alok Sharma), J.

¶35

arn/

¶36

All corrections made in the order have been incorporated in the order being emailed.

¶37

Arun Kumar Sharma, Private Secretary.

Vinay Kumar Verma and Anr. v. Dinesh Kotewala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Verma and Anr. v. Dinesh Kotewala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sitaram Meena Vs Shri O P Meena and Ors.

Kailash and Anr. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Nand Ram Vs National Highwary Authority

Rahul Nanda @ Rajkumar @ Raja Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Govind Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Soniram and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P