Aasheesh Sharma v. Gaurav Chichra

$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 347/2016 AASHEESH SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ajay Sharma, Advocate.

versus GAURAV CHICHRA ..... Respondent Through Mr.J.C.Mahendro, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 18.04.2016 C.M. No.13651/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Application disposed of.

CM(M) 347/2016 C.M. No.13650/2016 (stay) Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.3.2016 vide which the application of the plaintiff/non-applicant had been partly allowed under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC when a decree of possession had been passed in favour of the plaintiff/non-applicant. The petitioner is aggrieved by this finding. He states that the registered lease dated 16.6.2014 has not yet expired by efflux of time. Per contra, learned counsel for the plaintiff/non-applicant who has put in appearance on advance notice points out that the admitted rent at the rate of Rs.35,000/- is not being paid by the petitioner after the first

three months i.e. after 01.10.2014. All arrears of rent @ Rs.35,000/- per month (admitted rent) be cleared by the petitioner(tenant) within a period of three weeks from today and on that payment the impugned judgment will be stayed. If this payment is not made within the aforenoted period the plaintiff/non-applicant will be entitled to execute the decree of possession. Parties are directed to appear before the Trial Judge on the date already fixed. With these directions petition disposed of.

INDERMEET KAUR, J APRIL 18, 2016 ndn