Dismissed

Sabir Mohammad v. Nanakchand

Rajasthan HC17 Mar 2021CSA/254/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal regarding eviction of commercial premises. Appellant sought extra time to vacate. Court allowed time till June 2022 contingent on depositing arrears, paying monthly fees, and submission of undertaking to hand over vacant possession without damage or subletting.

What did the court decide?

Time granted to vacate premises by 30th June 2022; appellant directed to pay arrears and Rs. 2500/month and submit an undertaking to vacate peacefully.

Sabir Mohammad Vs Nanakchand — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 254/2019

¶4

Sabir Mohammad S/o Shri Abdul Rahman, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Shahpura, Tehsil - Shahpura, District Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Nanakchand S/o Hotchand, R/o Shahpura, District Bhilwara.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. M.K. Pitaliya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saruparia

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶11

Order

¶12

17/03/2021

¶13

After attempting to make submissions for sometime on the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant may be granted extra time for vacating the subject premises.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties regarding grant of extra time to vacate the subject premises.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the premises are commercial premises and the appellant is running a shop since long and may be granted time till December, 2022 for vacating the premises.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer for grant of time. It was submitted that the proceedings were filed in the year 2005 and rent of about Rs.1500/- was being paid and that also is in arrears. It was submitted that in case time is

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CSA-254/2019]

¶19

granted, then reasonable amount of mesne profit be directed to be paid.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and circumstance of the case, it appears appropriate to allow time to the appellant to vacate the premises by 30^th June, 2022 and allow mesne profit to the respondent untill the appellant vacates the premises @ Rs.2,500/per month from 01.04.2021 till 30.06.2022.

¶21

In view of the above, the learned counsel for the appellant seeks withdrawal of the second appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn. The stay application is also dismissed. However, the appellant is granted time to vacate the subject premises by 30^th June, 2022 on the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) the appellant shall submit an undertaking supported by affidavit before the trial court within 3 weeks from today to the effect that on or before 30^th June, 2022, he shall handover the peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises to the plaintiff-respondent. He shall also undertake not to cause any damage to the suit premises nor to make any alternation and not to assign/sublet or in any manner part with possession to any other person and not to put the premises to any use other than the present use and not to cause any nuisance.

¶23

(ii) the appellant shall deposit the arrears of the rent/mesne profit and of the decreetal amount within a period of two months and shall further pay the amount for use and occupation of the suit premises @ Rs.2,500/- per month w.e.f. 01.04.2021, to the respondent-landlord or deposit the same in the saving bank account of the respondent month by month on or before 15^th day of the next month. The respondent or

¶24

(3 of 3) [CSA-254/2019]

¶25

learned counsel for the respondent will give the details of the bank account, in which, the arrears of rent or mesne profit/month to month mesne profit will be deposited, to the appellant/s or counsel for the appellant/s within a period of two weeks from today. (iii) it is made clear that in case the appellant/s do not comply with any of the aforesaid conditions or violate any terms of the undertaking, then it will be open for the respondent landlord to get the decree executed forthwith in accordance with law.

¶26

No order as to costs.

¶27

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶28

114-Sachin/-

Sabir Mohammad v. Nanakchand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabir Mohammad v. Nanakchand

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

Champalal Vs Chandra Devi

Poona Ram @ Pawan Vs State of Rajasthan

Onkarnath Vs Lrs of Gangaram

Babu Singh Vs Gurdev Singh

Ravi Khurana Vs Mallu Ram Swami

Bajrang Lal Vs Babu Lal