Partly allowed

Tejnarayan and Ors. v. Jagannath Prasad

Rajasthan HC22 Mar 2018CFA/227/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil first appeal regarding eviction and rent recovery, the appellants requested and the respondent agreed to a five-year extension. The High Court granted possession up to March 21, 2023, subject to depositing mesne profit and submitting an undertaking, with execution permitted on breach or failure to deposit for four months.

What did the court decide?

Entitlement to possession until March 21, 2023 subject to depositing mesne profit; undertaking to be submitted; decree executable on failure to comply or missed deposits for four months.

Tejnarayan and Ors. Vs Jagannath Prasad — Partition | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 227/2018

¶3

Tejnarayan S/o Late Shri Prithviraj,

¶4

Beena,

¶5

Mamta,

¶6

Suman,

¶7

Arpana daughters of lat Shri Prithviraj

¶8

Smt. Premlata Widow Of Late Shri Prithviraj,

¶9

All by caste Mahajan, residents of Ward No.21 Mohalla Bodabas, Kotputli, District Jaipur Raj

¶10

----Defendants/Appellants

¶11

Versus

¶12

Jagannath Prasad S/o Shri Bihari Lal, B/c Brahmin, R/o Ward No.8 Mohalla Buchaheda, Kasba Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan

¶13

----Plaintiff/Respondent

¶14

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manoj Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶16

Judgment / Order

¶17

22/03/2018

¶18

Instant Civil First Appeal under Section 96 CPC has been filed by the defendants-appellants aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 02.02.2018 passed by learned Additional District Judge Kotputli, District Jaipur in Civil Suit No.23/2009 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for eviction and recovery of rent has been decreed.

¶19

Shri Manoj Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the defendants-appellants instead of pressing the appeal on merits, on

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

[CFA-227/2018]

¶22

instructions of his client Tej Narayan, who is present in the Court, stated that period of five years may be granted to the defendantsappellants to vacate the tenanted premise.

¶23

Mr. Abhi Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffrespondent, on instruction of his client Jagannath who is also present in the Court, has no objection in granting five years’ time to the defendants-appellants to vacate the tenanted premises.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is being decided in the following terms:-

¶25

The defendants-appellants shall be entitled to continue in possession of the suit premises up to 21^st March, 2023 but not beyond that, subject to condition that they would hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the tenanted premises to the plaintiff-respondent on or before 21^st March,2023.

¶26

The defendant-appellant shall deposit arrears of mesne profit, if any, due towards him up to 28^th February, 2018 at the monthly rate of Rs.350/- within a period of one month from today with the bank account of the plaintiffrespondent and thereafter, from the month of March, 2018, the defendants-appellants shall continue to deposit the mesne profit at the monthly rate of Rs.1,500/- in the bank account of the plaintiff-respondent by 15^th of each month.

¶27

The defendants-appellants shall not alienate or otherwise create third party right or hand over possession of the tenanted premises in question to any other person.

¶28

If the defendants-appellants fail to deposit the mesne profit consecutively for four months, the plaintiffrespondent shall be at liberty to execute the decree without any further reference to the Court.

¶29

Further, the defendants-appellants shall submit an undertaking on oath incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the trial court within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. In case, the defendants-appellants fail to submit the undertaking as aforesaid within four weeks from today and/or commit breach of any of the conditions of this order, the plaintiff-

¶30

(3 of 3)

¶31

[CFA-227/2018]

¶32

respondent shall be entitled to execute the decree forthwith and obtain possession of the suit premises in accordance with law.

¶33

The first appeal stands disposed of accordingly, Stay application is also disposed of.

¶34

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶35

Bairwa/40

Tejnarayan and Ors. v. Jagannath Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tejnarayan and Ors. v. Jagannath Prasad

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

Babu Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

State of Rajasthan Vs Ramesh Meena

Mukesh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Brilliant Academy Shikshan Vs University of Rajasthan and Ors.

Smt Shubra Yadav Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Smt Premlata and Ors. Vs Ravi Kumar and Ors.