Pushpa Gautam v. C.R. Gautam And ORS.

$~24 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 2821/2014 & CM No.27260/2016 PUSHPA GAUTAM ..... Petitioner Through:

Dr Jose. P. Verghese, Mr Dhruv Jose, Advocate.

versus C.R. GAUTAM AND ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Dr Amit George, Mr Satya Prakash Yadav and Mr Satpal Yadav, Advocates for no.1

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 19.01.2018 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 12.10.2012 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Senior Citizens, Distt South-West, Kapashera. 2.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the parties have persuaded their respective clients to agree to an arrangement. The parties have agreed that the respondents will not claim any maintenance from the petitioner. Further the respondents shall pay 50% of the rental received from the property bearing no. 439, Mahipalpur, New Delhi- 110037. The said amount will be paid by cheque/other banking channels to the petitioner on or before 10th day of each calendar month. Further, in the event, the tenant vacates the said premises, the respondents shall ensure that the 50% of the amount equivalent to the last rental continue to be paid to the petitioner on or before

10th day of each calendar month in order that the petitioner is not prejudiced on account of the tenant vacating the premises. Further, the respondents shall make all endeavours to re-let the premises as expeditiously as possible and in any event at a rental not less than the last rental received from the tenant, who is currently occupying the said premises. 3.

The impugned order is modified to the aforesaid extent. The petition and the pending application are disposed of.

4.

A copy of this order be signed by the respective parties as a token of their acceptance.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 19, 2018 MK