Dismissed

Ramesh Chand Dargadh S/O Shri Ramanand Dargadh, v. Satyanarayan Maheshwari S/O Shri Chhitarmal Maheshwari

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2024CSA/46/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal by a tenant against an eviction decree affirmed in first appeal. The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirmed the decree, but granted the appellant twenty months till 30.09.2025 to vacate, subject to payment of mesne profit, an undertaking with surety, and restrictions on transfer or alteration.

What did the court decide?

Twenty months till 30.09.2025 granted to appellant to vacate premises, subject to mesne profit, undertaking with ₹2 lakh surety, and no transfer/damage/alteration.

Ramesh Chand Dargadh S/O Shri Ramanand Dargadh, Vs… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:5687]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 46/2024

¶4

Ramesh Chand Dargadh S/o Shri Ramanand Dargadh, Owner Of Business- Madhusudan Taxtiles R/o Roopangarh Road, Madanganj Kishangarh

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Satyanarayan Maheshwari S/o Shri Chhitarmal Maheshwari, R/o Roopangarh Road, Madanganj Kishangarh

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. D.N. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.P. Garg

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

02/02/2024

¶13

Mr. R.P. Garg appearing for Caveator-respondent accepts memo of appeal.

¶14

At the stage of admission, a suggestion is made that sufficient time be granted to appellant-tenant for vacation of the suit premises subject to regular payment of rent/mesne profit.

¶15

Learned counsel for appellant suggested time period of 2 years whereas learned counsel of respondent agrees for 1 year 8 months and agreed by learned counsel for appellant.

¶16

In view of aforesaid, this second appeal under Section 100 of CPC is disposed of in following terms:-

¶17

i. The order and decree dated 19.10.2013 in C.S. No. 02/2009 affirmed in civil appeal No. 41/2013 on 07.12.2023 are hereby affirmed and the appeal stands dismissed.

¶18

[2024:RJ-JP:5687]

¶19

[CSA-46/2024]

¶20

ii. Twenty months time till 30.09.2025 is granted to appellant-defendant to vacate the suit premises.

¶21

iii. The appellant is restrained not to transfer or alienate the disputed property till handing over the possession to respondentplaintiff or his assignee.

¶22

iv. Appellant-defendant will continue to pay mesne profit as already ordered by the Court.

¶23

v. The appellant-defendant will not cause any damage or substantial alteration to the property in dispute till its vacation and handing over the possession to the respondent-plaintiff.

¶24

With aforesaid conditions an undertaking with one surety of ₹2 Lakh will be submitted by the appellant-defendant to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, within a period of 30 days.

¶25

The appeal stands disposed of.

¶26

Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶27

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶28

MONU /13

Ramesh Chand Dargadh S/O Shri Ramanand Dargadh, v. Satyanarayan Maheshwari S/O Shri Chhitarmal Maheshwari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand Dargadh S/O Shri Ramanand Dargadh, v. Satyanarayan Maheshwari S/O Shri Chhitarmal Maheshwari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritesh Mewara Vs Babu Lal

I C I C I Lombard Gen Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Farmeena and Others

Afsar Son of Karim Urf Abdul Karim, Vs Nagar Parishad.Karauli

R S E B Vs Sawai Madhopur Oil Plus Industries

I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Ladu S/O Shri Halu

Geeta Bai W/O Satyanarayan Vs Avdhesh Kumar Gupta Son of Narayan Lal