Disposed

Smt Yashoda v. Shri Vyapar Dharmasala

Rajasthan HC6 Feb 2018CSA/393/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an appeal regarding tenancy. With consent of both parties, it allowed tenants to occupy premises until Feb 28, 2019, and directed payment of rents/mesne profits, conditional on submitting an undertaking.

What did the court decide?

Tenants allowed to continue occupation until February 28, 2019; directed to pay mesne profits and submit undertaking with conditions.

Smt Yashoda Vs Shri Vyapar Dharmasala — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶3

ORDER

¶4

(S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.393/2012)

¶5

Smt. Yashoda wife of late Shri Gulshan Rai, by caste Punjabi

¶6

Naveen son of late Shri Gulshan Rai, by caste Punjabi

¶7

David son of Shri Gulshan Rai, by caste Punjabi

¶8

all residents of Tehsil Ramgarh District Alwar LRs of deceased Gulshan Rai

¶9

--- Appellants/ Defendants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Shri Vyapar Dharamshala Ramgarh, through so called President Govind Prasad son of Shri Bhuramal, by caste Mahajan, resident of Ramgarh District Alwar.

¶12

Shri Vyapar Dharamshala Ramgarh through so called Secretary Jagan Prasad son of Shri Manphool Ram, by caste Mahajan R/o Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.)

¶13

--- Respondents/ Plaintiffs

¶14

Date of Order: February 06, 2018.

¶15

PRESENT

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶17

Mr. Manish Gupta, for the appellants-tenants.

¶18

Mr. Ashwani Chobisa, for respondents-landlords.

¶19

BY THE COURT :

¶20

After arguing the matter at some length, the learned counsel for the appellants-tenants submits on instruction of his clients that the tenants shall vacate the tenanted premises on or before February 28, 2019, during which period they would make arrangements for an alternative premises to run their business therefrom.

¶21

¶22

Mr. Ashwani Chobisa, appearing on behalf of the respondents-

¶23

landlords, with instruction from his clients agreed to the proposal of learned counsel for the tenants and submits that in the event of the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge No.1, Alwar dated 4- 8-2012 were to be upheld, the respondents landlords would have no objection with the tenants continuing in occupation of the tenanted premises in question only till February 28, 2019 and in no event beyond the said date.

¶24

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

¶25

(i) The appellants-tenants shall be entitled to continue in occupation of the tenanted premises in question upto February 28, 2019, but not beyond subject to condition that they would hand over the vacant possession of the premises in question to respondents-landlords on or before February 28, 2019.

¶26

(ii) The petitioners-tenants shall pay arrears of rent or mesne profits, if any, till February 28, 2018, as determined by the courts within a period of two months from today.

¶27

(iv) The appellants-tenants commencing 1st March, 2018 shall pay to respondents-landlords, mesne profits @ Rs.600/- per month on or before 10th of each month.

¶28

(v) The appellants-tenants shall not alienate or otherwise create third

¶29

¶30

party right, or hand over possession of the tenanted premises in question to any other person.

¶31

Further, the appellants-tenants shall submit an undertaking incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2 Alwar, within a period of thirty days, from the date of this order. In case the appellants-tenants fail to submit the undertaking as aforesaid within thirty days from today, and/ or breaches the conditions of this order, the respondents-landlords shall be entitled to the immediate execution of the judgment and decree dated 4-8-2012 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.

¶32

The second appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

(Alok Sharma), J.

arn/

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

¶37

Arun Kumar Sharma, Private Secretary.

Smt Yashoda v. Shri Vyapar Dharmasala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Yashoda v. Shri Vyapar Dharmasala

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

Ramesh Chand Vs Smt Satyabhama and Anr.

Fazal Kadir Vs Gordhan Lal Agrawal through Lrs

Illahibux Vs Rafiq

Immamuddin Vs Noor Mohad

Vidystahli Shiksha Samiti Vs Chairman Ncte and Anr.

Vivek Pharmachem India Ltd. Vs Rajasthan Electricity REGULATORYandORS