High CourtsSingle Bench

Kundan Lal vs Sanjay Kumar

Delhi High Court · Decided on 29 November 2019 · Citation: (2019) 11 DEL CK 0405

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 — Section 14(1)(e)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
RC.Revision No. 474 Of 2015
Ask AI about this case

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

12 paragraphs · 342 words

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

RC.REV. 474/2015 & CM APPL.18663/2015 (stay)

1.

Petitioner impugns order dated 23.04.2015, whereby the leave to defend application of the petitioner was dismissed and an eviction order passed.

2.

Subject eviction petition was filed by the respondent seeking eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, from one shop situated at the ground floor in property No.B-102/1 (old No.B-457/1), Madhu Kunj, Shivaji Road, North Ghonda, Shahdara, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan annexed with the eviction petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition. He further submits that that he has instructions on behalf of the petitioner to undertake that petitioner shall vacate and handover the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 15.01.2020.

4.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further undertakes on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner shall clear all water, electricity and other dues/charges in respect of the tenanted premises before the petitioner vacates the premises on or before 15.01.2020. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further undertakes on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner shall not sublet, assign or part with the possession of the tenanted premises or any part thereof. He further undertakes that petitioner shall not cause any damage to the tenanted premises and shall hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the tenanted premises in the same condition as it exists today subject to normal wear and tear.

5.

Learned counsels for the parties submit that the use and occupation charges have been settled.

6.

The undertaking is accepted.

7.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that the undertaking is acceptable to the respondent.

8.

Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.

9.

Subject to petitioner filing an affidavit of undertaking in the above terms, within a period of two weeks, execution of the impugned order dated 23.04.2015 shall remain stayed till 15.01.2020.

10.

Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.