High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 02 RAJ CK 0033

Sohan Lal son of Ghewar Chand & Anr vs Legal Heirs of Late Mangi Lal son of Mukan Chand & Anr

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 2 February 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dinesh Mehta
CASE NUMBER
278 of 2015

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

28 paragraphs · 567 words
1.

This second appeal by the defendants has arisen out of the suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent as filed by the plaintiffs-landlord

wherein the learned First Appellate Court by its impugned Judgment and Decree dated 07.09.2015, as passed in Civil Appeal No. 18/2005, has

partly maintained the decree for eviction.

2.

Having heard the counsel for the appellants and having perused the material placed on record, when this Court found no case for interference in

the concurrent findings recorded by the learned Courts below, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted, in the alternative, that some time

may be allowed to the appellants to vacate the premises. The learned counsel submitted that the appellants have been residing in the suit premises

for over 30 years and shall need some time to make alternative arrangements. Learned counsel for the appellants agreed to pay enhanced amount

of mesne profits, particularly during the period they would be retaining the house, upon granting indulgence by this Court.

3.

Mr. Dev Anand Solanki, learned counsel appearing for the appellants-defendants, while seeking permission to withdraw the present second

appeal, however, submits that the appellantsdefendants be permitted to retain the possession of the suit premises for a period of one year, after

which, they shall handover the vacant and peaceful possession to the plaintiffsrespondents.

4.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, it appears appropriate to allow some breathing time to the

appellants-defendants to vacate the suit premises by 28th February, 2019, while enhancing amount the towards damages, for use and occupation

of the suit premises, particularly during the extra period to vacate as being allowed in this appeal @ Rs. 1,000/- per month, until the

appellantsdefendants vacate the suit premises.

5.

Of course, for no ground to interfere otherwise, this second appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn; however, the appellantsdefendants are

granted time to vacate the suit premises by 28th February, 2019 on the following conditions:-

(i) The appellants shall personally submit an undertaking supported by affidavit before the Trial Court within three weeks from today to the effect

that on or before 28th February, 2019, they shall hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises to the plaintiffs( respondents. They

shall also undertake not to cause any damage to the suit premises nor to make any alteration and not to assign, sublet or in any manner part with

possession to any other person and not to put the premises to any use other than the present use and not to cause any nuisance.

(ii) The appellants-defendants shall deposit within three weeks the arrears, if any, of the rent/mesne profits and of the decreetal amount and shall

further pay to the landlord-respondents the amount for use and occupation of the suit premises @ Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) per

month. First such payment shall be made on or before 7th March, 2018. The appellants may deposit this amount in the bank account of the

landlord (if the particulars thereof are furnished to the appellants), month by month on or before 7th day of the each month.

6.

It is made clear that upon the appellants'' failure to comply with any of the conditions aforesaid or violating any terms of the undertaking, the

plaintiffs-respondents shall be entitled to execute the decree forthwith, in accordance with law.

7.

No costs.