AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 213 wordsN.S.Sanjay Gowda, J
The respondent filed a writ petition challenging the act of the appellant in charging penal rent.
In this writ petition, the learned Single Judge has held that if the renovation was required of the quarters in respect of which a penal rent was being charged, the respondent would switch to other premises, which may be offered by the appellant by paying the same rent.
After the matter was heard for some time, the respondent filed an affidavit that he would vacate the quarters on 07.05.2006. Pursuant to this affidavit, it is reported by the appellant that the respondent has, in fact, vacated on 22.04.2026.
In that view of the matter, nothing survives in this appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant, however, points out that the respondent seeks to impose a condition for his handing over the quarters. It is made clear that the respondent cannot impose any condition against the appellant for vacation of the quarters in light of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
It is also stated by learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent now has instructed him that the respondent has vacated the quarters unconditionally. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Connected Civil Applications also stand disposed of.