Disposed

Nihal Chand Son of Shri Devi Singh Mahajan, v. Prem Kishan Son of Shri Kishan

Rajasthan HC1 Nov 2022CSA/900/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal against eviction judgment disposed of by consent to allow tenancy continuation till 30.04.2025, subject to mesne profit payments and vacant possession delivery.

What did the court decide?

Tenants allowed to retain possession till 30.04.2025 subject to conditions including mesne profit payment and delivery of vacant possession thereafter.

Nihal Chand Son of Shri Devi Singh Mahajan, Vs Prem Kishan Son… — Partition | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 900/2011

¶3

Nihal Chand son of Shri Devi Singh Mahajan, proprietor Nihal Chand Mahendra Kumar Cloth Merchant, Agrasain Market, Beawar (Raj.) (deceased) through his legal representatives:-

¶4

1/1. Norat Kanwat Wife Of Late Nihal Chand, Resident Of Pratap Colony, Near Sabji Mandi, Beawar District Ajmer.

¶5

1/2. Arvind Kumar Son Of Late Nihal Chand, Resident Of Pratap Colony, Near Sabji Mandi, Beawar District Ajmer.

¶6

1/3. Sneha Lata Wife Of Ajeet Kumar, D/o Late Nihal Chand, Resident Of Maya Varam, Tamilnadu, District Tanjawar.

¶7

1/4. Mahendra Kumar Son Of Late Nihal Chand, Resident Of Pratap Colony, Near Sabji Mandi, Beawar District Ajmer.

¶8

1/5. Gyan Chand Son Of Late Nihal Chand, Resident Of Pratap Colony, Near Sabji Mandi, Beawar District Ajmer.

¶9

------ Defendants-appellants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Prem Kishan son of Shri Kishan, resident of Bhilwada (Raj.)

¶12

-----Plaintiff-respondent

¶13

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. M.M. Ranjan Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rohan Agarwal Mr. Gyan Chand appellant No.1/4 present in person
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. R.K. Daga

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

¶15

01/11/2022

¶16

Appellants-defendants have preferred this second appeal against judgment and decree for eviction dated 1.10.2011 by the Court of Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Beawar District Ajmer in Civil Regular Appeal No.5/2009 (26/2004), passed on the ground of bonafide and reasonable necessity. Vide judgment and decree dated 21.7.2004 by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Beawar District Ajmer in Civil Suit No.481/1993 passed decree for eviction on ground of default only, but the first

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CSA-900/2011]

¶19

Appellate Court extended the benefit of first default and passed the decree for eviction against appellants-defendants.

¶20

After arguing the second appeal on merits for some time, counsel for appellants, on instruction of appellants (appellant No.1/4 is present in the Court) submits that if some reasonable time is granted to vacate and hand over the possession of rented shop to respondent-landlord, appellants-tenants would not press the second appeal on merits.

¶21

Learned counsel for respondent-landlord, on instructions of respondent-landlord submits that in case the second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, some reasonable time may be granted to appellants-tenants to vacate and handed over the possession of rented shop, subject to payment of due mesne profits and enhanced mesne profits for future.

¶22

In view of above, with the consent of learned counsel for both parties, on instruction of their respective parties, this second appeal is disposed of in following terms:-

¶23

“(i) The appellants-tenants are allowed to continue in possession of rented shop upto 30.04.2025, subject to condition that they shall vacate and hand over possession of rented shop to landlord on or before 30.04.2025.

¶24

(ii) The appellants-tenants would pay arrears of mesne profits at the rate of Rs.5000/- till November 2022 within a period of two months and from December 2022 to 30.04.2025 shall pay mesne profits at the rate of Rs.5000/-per month regularly, in the bank account furnished by respondent-landlord, until the vacation and handing over possession of rented shop to the respondent-landlord.

¶25

(iii) The appellants-tenants shall not alienate or otherwise create third party right or hand over possession of rented shop in question to any other person.

¶26

(iv) The appellants-tenants shall furnish an undertaking incorporating aforesaid conditions, before the trial court

¶27

(3 of 3) [CSA-900/2011]

¶28

within a period of four weeks, from the date of this order with an advance copy to landlord.”

¶29

In case appellants fails to submit the undertaking, as aforesaid, and/or commits breach of conditions of this order, landlord shall be entitled to initiate immediate execution of judgment and decree to obtain possession of premises in issue forthwith, in accordance with law, and may also initiate proceedings of contempt for breach of undertaking.

¶30

Stay application and any other pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

¶31

Record of courts below be sent back.

¶32

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶33

NITIN /70

Nihal Chand Son of Shri Devi Singh Mahajan, v. Prem Kishan Son of Shri Kishan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nihal Chand Son of Shri Devi Singh Mahajan, v. Prem Kishan Son of Shri Kishan

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

Jagannath Prasad Alias Jaggi Ram Thr Lrs Vs Suresh Chand

Madanlal S/O Shri Bhagirath Vs Ramu S/O Shri Gulla Jat

Moolchand S/O Ramdutt Vs Ram Singh S/O Bihari Lal

Jaafar and Others Vs Raisuddin through Lrs and Others

Manju Meena D/O Shri Gopal Lal Meena W/O Shri Deepak Meena Vs Deepak Meena S/O Shri Ramesh Chand Meena

Tejendra Singh Bindra Son of Shri Teerath Singh, Vs Narendra Singh Son of Late Shri Harman Singh