Mohammad Farooq vs Additional Session Judge

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.—Heard Mr. Radha Kamal Singh, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Mr. Abul Fazal Jaffery, learned counsel for opposite party no. 3.

This writ petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 29.10.2009 passed in P.A. Case No. 27 of 2006 as well as the judgment and order dated 20.02.2017 passed in Rent Appeal No. 31 of 2009 whereby the application for release of the premises in question i.e., House No. 178/219, Golaganj, P.S. Wazirganj, Lucknow filed by the opposite party no. 3, landlord, was allowed and the rent appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on merit.

Vide order dated 03.04.2017, after arguing the matter at some length learned counsel for petitioner had sought time to seek instructions from his client with respect to time he needs to vacate the premise in question.

Vide order dated 10.4.2017, learned counsel for petitioner had sought time to file an affidavit giving the undertaking that the petitioner will vacate the premises and handover peaceful possession to opposite party no. 3 within six months.

Today, when the case is taken up, the undertaking of Mohammad Farooq, petitioner, in the form of affidavit has been filed before the Court, after giving copy of the same to learned counsel for opposite party no. 3, the same is taken on record.

As per said undertaking, the petitioner has undertaken to handover the peaceful possession of the premise in question to opposite party no. 3, landlord, within six months from the date of affidavit i.e., 13.4.2017.

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 submits that in case the petitioner wants six months time to vacate the premise in question and handover the possession of the same within six months, the Court may grant such time, however, in case the petitioner does not handover the premise in question to opposite party no. 3 as per his undertaking, the opposite party no. 3 may be permitted to pursue the execution case which he has already filed for execution of the impugned decree.

In view of above, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the following conditions:

(1) That the petitioner will handover the possession of the house in question which is in his occupation to opposite party no. 3, landlord, within six months from 13.4.2017.

(2) The petitioner will pay and clear of all the dues of the premise in question before handing over the premise in question.

(3) The petitioner will pay the arrears of rent and will also pay rent of the premise in question every month as and when the same fall due to landlord and will clear all the arrears before handing over the possession of the house in question to the landlord.

(4) In case petitioner fails to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of the premise to the landlord within the time limit prescribed herein above, the opposite party no. 3 would be at liberty to pursue the execution case filed by him for the execution of the impugned decree and get the decree enforced by taking appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

(5) In case in spite of undertaking given before the Court the petitioner fails to adhere to the undertaking and vacate and handover the premise in question to opposite party no. 3, landlord, it will amount to committing contempt of this Court.