Shri Brij Mohan Batta v. Shri Moti Lal Aggarwal And Sons Prop. Late Shri Moti Lal Aggarwal (Deceased) Through Lrs

$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 79/2022 SHRI BRIJ MOHAN BATTA .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Charu Ambwani, Advocate.

versus SHRI MOTI LAL AGGARWAL AND SONS PROP. LATE SHRI MOTI LAL AGGARWAL (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Anubhav Gupta, Panel Counsel for GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 22.07.2025 1.

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the final judgment and order passed by this Court on 22nd September, 2021 in RC. REV.157/2020.

2.

By way of the said order, the respondent/tenant was directed to handover peaceful, vacant and physical possession of the tenanted premises to the petitioner/landlord within two (2) weeks. The operative parts of the said judgment are set out below:

"4. The LRs of the petitioner/tenant are directed to remove the goods from the tenanted premises/shop forthwith, and handover peaceful, vacant and physical possession of the same to the landlord within two weeks from today.

5. The learned counsel for the landlord states, upon instructions, that for the moment he is not pressing for payment of use and occupation charges." 3.

It is the case of the petitioner that the possession was handed over to the CONT.CAS(C) 79/2022 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2025 at 11:56:43

petitioner only on 26th August, 2022, during the pendency of the contempt proceedings.

4.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that contempt proceedings be initiated against the respondent for not having paid the user and occupation charges for the period during the unauthorized occupation of the premises by the respondent/tenant.

5.

In my considered view, there was no direction given by the Court to the respondent/tenant to pay any amount towards user and occupation charges. In fact, counsel for the petitioner on instructions from the petitioner had submitted that, for the moment, he is not pressing for payment of user and occupation charges.

6.

Therefore, in these circumstances, no case for initiating contempt proceedings is made out.

7.

In view of the above, the present contempt proceedings are closed. 8.

Needless to state, the petitioner shall be free to take appropriate legal proceedings that may be available in law, to recover the aforesaid amounts. AMIT BANSAL, J JULY 22, 2025 Rzu CONT.CAS(C) 79/2022 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2025 at 11:56:43