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
6 paragraphs · 233 wordsRakesh Kumar Jain, J.
CM No. 7795-CII of 2011
Allowed as prayed for.
C.R. No. 2021 of 2011
After arguing for some time, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that he does not want to challenge the order of eviction on merit. Hence, the revision petition is dismissed. However, he submits that he is in possession of the demised premises since 2004 and would require some reasonable time to find out some alternate accommodation.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case in which the claim of the Petitioner is that he is in possession of the demised premises since 2004 and would require some time to find out an alternate accommodation, a period of three months is granted to him to vacate the demised premises on or before 23.6.2011 subject to his furnishing an undertaking before the learned Rent Controller, Panchkula, within a period of 15 days in that regard from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and clearing all the arrears of rent if any due. He is also directed to pay the rent of the ensuing month till the month of June, 2011. It is also made clear that in case undertaking which is to be filed is violated by the Petitioner, then he would be liable to be prosecuted in terms of the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.