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 · 228 wordsKurian, J.—Leave granted.
The appellant is the tenant who has suffered the order regarding mesne profits to the tune of Rs. 60,000/- per month. When the matter came up before this Court, having heard the caveator also, a suggestion was put whether the appellant is willing to surrender vacant possession so as to purchase peace, in which case, the landlord may not claim any mesne profits.
Though reluctantly, the landlord has agreed to the proposal. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, on instruction, submits that the vacant possession of the premises will be handed over on or before 14.05.2017 before 8.00 PM. The undertaking is recorded. We make it clear that in case the undertaking is violated, the appellant shall be visited with all legal actions including contempt of court.
In that view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside. The revision filed by the appellant is dismissed and order passed by the Rent Controller is restored.
Mr. Manoj Gorkela, learned counsel, is appointed as Advocate Commissioner for the smooth handing over of the premises to the respondent. The appellant is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 50,000/- (L Fifty Thousand) to the Advocate Commissioner.
In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.