Disposed

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son of Ram Singh v. Chhuttan Lal Bairwa Son of Shri Prahlad Ram Bairwa

Rajasthan HC7 Jan 2020CW/192/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 192/2020, the petitioner applied for a one-year extension to vacate posessions without contesting the writ on merits. The High Court granted one-year possession but imposed strict conditions regarding mesne profit deposits and an undertaking to avoid alienation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted possession till 06.01.2021; ordered deposit of mesne profit; allowed respondent to execute decree after four consecutive failures to deposit.

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son of Ram Singh Vs Chhuttan… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 192/2020

¶3

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son Of Ram Singh, Aged About 42 Years, By-Caste Rajput, Resident Of Plot No. 68 Jagriti (Survey No. 32), Dadabadi Kachhi Basti, In Front Of Railway Line, Near Rampura Phatak Sanganer, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Chhuttan Lal Bairwa Son Of Shri Prahlad Ram Bairwa, Aged About 60 Years, By-Caste Bairwa,, Resident Of House No. 115/30 Agrawal Farm Mansarovar, Jaipur.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : None present

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶10

Order

¶11

07/01/2020

¶12

The instant Civil Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the judgment dated 05.12.2019 passed by Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur, whereby the said Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 17.01.2019 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur in Rent Application No.574/2015.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Rajneesh Gupta after arguing the matter at some length, on instruction of his client, has not pressed this writ petition on merits. The only prayer made by him is that time of one year may kindly be granted to the petitioner to vacate the tenanted premises.

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CW-192/2020]

¶16

In view of the aforesaid submission of learned counsel

¶17

for the petitioner, this writ petition is being decided in the following terms:-

¶18

The petitioner shall be entitled to continue in possession of the suit premises till 06.01.2021 but not beyond that, subject to condition that he will hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 06.01.2021.

¶19

The petitioner shall deposit arrears of mesne profit, if any, due towards him up to 31.01.2019 @ Rs.4000/- per month within a period of one month from today in the Bank account of the respondent and thereafter, from 01.02.2019, the petitioner shall deposit the mesne profit @ Rs.12000/- in the bank account of the respondent by 15^th of each month. The learned counsel for the respondent shall furnish the details of respondent’s Bank account to the counsel for the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from today, failing which, the amount be deposited in the Tribunal and the respondent shall be at liberty to withdraw the same.

¶20

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

¶21

If the petitioner fails to deposit the mesne profit consecutively for four months, the respondent shall be at liberty to execute the decree without any further reference to the Court.

¶22

Further, the petitioner shall submit an undertaking on oath incorporating the aforesaid conditions before the learned Rent Tribunal, Jaipur within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. In case, the petitioner fails to submit the undertaking, as aforesaid, within four weeks from today and/or commits breach of any of the conditions of this order, the respondent shall be entitled to execute the decree forthwith and

¶23

(3 of 3) [CW-192/2020]

¶24

obtain possession of the suit premises in accordance with law and it will be open for the respondent to initiate contempt proceedings in this Court.

¶25

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Consequent upon disposal of the writ petition, stay application filed therwith does not survice and same also stands disposed of.

¶26

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶27

Mohit Rohila/99

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son of Ram Singh v. Chhuttan Lal Bairwa Son of Shri Prahlad Ram Bairwa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son of Ram Singh v. Chhuttan Lal Bairwa Son of Shri Prahlad Ram Bairwa

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

Krishna Kumar Taneja S/O Late Shri Shobhraj Taneja Vs Smt. Ravindra Arora W/O Shri Ashok Arora D/O Late Shri Shobhraj

Narayanji Saini and Others Vs Smt Shanti Devi and Others

Rajesh Kuamr S/O Radheyshyam Vs Harnarayan S/O Shri Kanhaiya Lal

Gulab Chand Mittal S/O Late Sh. Panna Lal Mittal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Smt. Sheela Bain Widow W/O Shri Rajendra Bhai Prema Ji Vs Smt. Jamna Bain (Since Deceased) through Legal Heirs

Indus Hotels Corp Ltd. Vs Smt Maheshwari Devi and Others