Disposed

Roop Chand v. Jhanwar Lal

Rajasthan HC13 Dec 2018CSA/231/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second appeal arising from a landlord-tenant eviction dispute, the High Court disposed of the matter without deciding substantive issues. By consensus of counsel, the appellate dismissal was quashed, and the appellant was granted a stay of execution until March 31, 2020, conditioned upon an undertaking to vacate and pay mesne profit. The appeal itself stands disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The second appeal stood disposed of. The decree execution was stayed until 31.03.2020, conditional upon the appellant's undertaking to vacate and pay mesne profit.

Roop Chand Vs Jhanwar Lal — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 231/2018

¶3

Roop Chand S/o Shri Mudna Ram, Aged About 65 Years, B/c Goyal, Through Goyal Tailors, Sadar Bazar, Nokha, District Bikaner

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Jhanwar Lal S/o Shri Sohan Lal, B/c Marothi Chowk, Nokha, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manoj Bhandari with Mr. Prateek Surana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dhanesh Saraswat

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶10

Order

¶11

13/12/2018

¶12

Appellant-defendant has preferred this second appeal aggrieved by impugned judgment & decree dated 12.10.2018 passed by Addl. District Judge No.1, Bikaner (for short, ‘first appellate Court’) dismissing his appeal against judgment and decree dated 04.02.2014, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nokha (for short, ‘learned trial Court’), whereby the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff, for eviction and recovery of rent against appellant-defendant was decreed.

¶13

Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal are that respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against appellant-defendant stating that the suit property a Shop, which is situated in Sadar Bazar, Nokha, was given on rent but as

¶14

(2 of 5)

¶15

[CSA-231/2018]

¶16

the rent become due on 1^st of March, 2012 was not paid till 30^th of May, 2012, respondent sent a notice under Section 106 read with Section 111(h) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 terminating the tenancy. The respondent-plaintiff, while claiming unpaid rent of Rs.10,000/- from 01.07.2012, in the plaint, prayed for decree of eviction, recovery of outstanding rent, damages for use and occupation and notice expenses.

¶17

Appellant-defendant submitted his written reply stating therein that he had paid rent till February, 2012 and further submitted that remaining rent was offered to the respondentplaintiff but he did not accept the same as such money-order of Rs.2200/- was sent but the respondent-plaintiff refused to receive the same. It is the case of appellant-defendant that he made endeavor to deposit the amount, by sending notice on 13.07.2012 but in vain, and therefore, the notice terminating tenancy is not valid.

¶18

Learned trial Court, on the basis of pleadings of rival parties, framed seven issues for determination, and thereafter, the rival parties tendered ocular as well as documentary evidence. Learned trial Court, thereafter, proceeded to decide the issues and after appreciating the evidence available on record decreed the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff directing the defendant to vacate the shop in question within a period of one month and to handover possession with a direction to deposit due rent @Rs.1100/- per month from 01.07.2012. The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court was challenged by way of appeal by appellant-

¶19

(3 of 5)

¶20

[CSA-231/2018]

¶21

defendant before the first appellate Court, which was dismissed affirming the judgment & decree passed by learned trial Court.

¶22

Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant, after due deliberations, has submitted that a reasonable time may be granted to him to handover peaceful vacant possession of the suit shop.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord has very candidly accepted the proposal of learned counsel for the appellant to allow some time for vacating the rented premises. After thorough deliberations, learned counsel for the respondentlandlord has agreed to allow a reasonable time to the appellant to vacate the premises latest by 31^st of March, 2020 subject to paying mesne profit @Rs.3300/- from the date of judgment & decree dated 12.10.2018 uptil handing over vacant possession of the suit shop to respondent-plaintiff, as ordered by learned trial Court and affirmed by learned first appellate Court.

¶24

The aforesaid reasonable period to vacate the premises with mesne profit @Rs.3300/- per month from 12.10.2018 and payment of arrears of rent is accepted by learned counsel for the appellant without any demure.

¶25

Accordingly, the present second appeal of the appellantdefendant is closed in terms of following conditions and directions:-

¶26

(4 of 5)

¶27

[CSA-231/2018]

¶28

(i) Appellant-defendant shall furnish a written undertaking in the trial Court within a month incorporating therein to hand-over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property in dispute to the respondent-plaintiff on or before 31.03.2020 and shall also undertake not to cause any damage to it and also maintain the same as it is.

¶29

(ii) Appellant-defendant shall also pay mesne profit @Rs.3300/- per month from 12.10.2018 and will further continue to pay the same every month by 15^th day of the next succeeding month, or in advance uptil vacant possession is handed over to the respondentlandlord. The arrears of rent and mesne profit, as determined by learned trial Court and affirmed by learned first appellate Court, if not already paid, shall also be paid by him within a period of three months from today and entire amount, including the amount already deposited on this account, will be disbursed to the respondent-plaintiff.

¶30

(iii) Appellant-defendant shall further undertake that he will 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 and if he does so, the same will be treated as void.

¶31

(iv) The respondent-plaintiff will furnish the details of bank account number in which the arrears of rent, mesne profit and regular mesne profit is now to be deposited.

¶32

(5 of 5)

¶33

[CSA-231/2018]

¶34

Arrears of rent and mesne profit is to be deposited by appellant-defendant within a period of three months from today.

¶35

(v) On appellant-defendant’s furnishing the undertaking aforesaid and abiding by the terms and conditions of the order, respondent-plaintiff shall not execute the impugned decree till 31.03.2020 .

¶36

The appellant shall submit a copy of the undertaking before this Court along with his affidavit. It is made clear that in case the appellant-defendant does not comply with any of the aforesaid conditions, then it will be open for the respondent-plaintiff to get the decree executed forthwith even before the aforesaid date, i.e., 31.03.2020, and the respondent-plaintiff may also initiate contempt proceedings in this Court against the appellantdefendant.

¶37

With the aforesaid terms, conditions and directions, the present second appeal of the appellant-defendant, stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶38

A copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Courts below forthwith.

¶39

20-T.Singh/-

Roop Chand v. Jhanwar Lal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roop Chand v. Jhanwar 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

Manohar Lal Bhati Vs Smt. Luni Devi and Ors.

Manohar Lal Bhati Vs Smt. Luni Devi and Ors.

Manohar Lal Bhati Vs Antari Devi and Ors.

Jai Das Vs State of Rajasthan

Balla @ Balwant Vs State

Meenakshi Vs Dhanraj