Allowed

Furkan Ahmed v. Kailash Chand Palliwal

Rajasthan HC2 Jul 2019CFA/488/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against a judgment and decree in a Civil First Appeal regarding tenanted premises. Appellant sought time to vacate; respondent consented. Court modified the decree to allow time for possession and specified mesne profit terms.

What did the court decide?

Entitlement to continue in possession until September 30, 2019; deposit mesne profit from July 2019 onwards; submission of undertaking within four weeks.

Furkan Ahmed Vs Kailash Chand Palliwal — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 488/20"05

¶2

F~~rltan Ahmed S/o Shri Shafik Ahmed, aged about 45 years B/c Musalrnan, R/o Uadai Kalan, Tehsil Gangapur City, Prop,rietor National Electric Store, Naya Bazar, Gangapur City, Distt. Sawaimad hopur Rajasthan

¶3

Versus

¶4

$'ji, f I. Kailash Chand Palliwal ~$0 '~hrf kishaii Chand Palliwal, aged about 55 years R/o Near Zama ~asiid, Gangapur City, Distt. Sawaimadhopur e* Rajasthan

¶5

P ----Respondent

¶6

For Appellarit(s) : Mr. Ganesh Meena Agpef;larit present in person &fs$al .i,* 2%. > 'eG'"'V 2) .*

¶7

.-----Q%,oT,Qo%g ----

¶8

1. ,"it; 2 ,, 2 r

¶9

The instant Civil ii$ifi~~&l'-b+dde~ .I 11 section 96 CPC has been f \ i $;? ,< . f; P filed by the defendant-app61'iirit aggiieved by the judgment and decree dated 26/5/2005 p5sked:-bythe 1,earned Additional District Judge, Gangapur City, SaiwaimadhopC~r.

¶10

L-earned cci.~nsel for the appellant, after arguing the rrlatter at some length, on instructions of his client who is present in per-son, has not pressed this appeal on merits. The only prayer made by hirn is that time of two years may kindly be granted to hirn to vacate the tenanted prernises.

¶11

Mr. Jinesh Jain, learned counsel for the respondent has no objection in granting the time as prayed for by t.he appellant for vacating the tenanted premises.

¶12

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

¶13

I. The defendant-appellant shall be entitled to continue in possession of theb,sui.tipreni~s~~~~uptill 30th June, 2021 but *,@- %" ?% ** .- i

¶14

not beyond {hat, subject to condition that he will hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 30th June,

¶15

*, ..2 0 2 1 . ,d 9

¶16

The appellant shall +*<. dep.o~$ arrears of mesne profit, if any, due towa,rds hi'm up to 30th June,2019 at the rate of Rs.l,000/-per **.".** {month within -. a period of one month from **2."** **_8'_** :> * r, "$2

¶17

today with th&lyzf$k atcednyf:of the respondent and I "p

¶18

&ereafter, frohr tee month: of 3uly,2019, the appellant shall continue to $l&posit the rnesne profit at the same rate in the bankiaqcount of the respondents by 15th of each month. ,< ' 6

¶19

The appellant dtJal:l. n,ottalienate .or otherwise create r-- 1 ** third party right &:tia,fid.. tqve f";8 over possession of the tenanted " I .**

¶20

premises in qu,et,'op'to-gnj, athe~~~erson.

¶21

If the appellant fails to deposit the mesne profit consecutively 'fo',r 'fdur months, the respondents shall be at liberty to execute the decree without any further reference to the Court.

¶22

Further, the appellant shall submit an undertaking on oath incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the Additional District Judge, Gangapur City, Sawaimadhopur within a period 'of four weeks from the date of this order. In case, the appellant fail:^ to submit the undertaking as aforesaid within fcjur weeks from

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[CFA-488/2005]

¶25

today and/or commits breach of any of the conditions of this order, the resspondent shall be entitled to execute the decree forthwith and obtain possession of the suit premises in accordance with law.

¶26

The first appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

(PRAKASH %UPTA),J

Furkan Ahmed v. Kailash Chand Palliwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Furkan Ahmed v. Kailash Chand Palliwal

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

Kalyan Singh and Ors. Vs Banwari Lal and Ors.

Hanuman Prasad Thr Lrs Vs Thakurdutt and Anr. Thr Lrs

M/S Rajasthan Consultancy Organization Limited through the Chairman Vs Shri Virendra Nath Bhargava S/O Shri Ramnath Bhargava

Abdul Waheed Vs Saleem and Others

Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Bhanwar Lal Sharma Vs Shriram Transport Co. Finance Ltd.

Charan Singh S/O Lal Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan