Dr Tamizuddin & ANR v. Mohd Zahid & ORS

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 324/2015 & C.M. No.12000/2015 DR TAMIZUDDIN & ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Jitender Kumar Dhingra, Adv.

along with Petitioner No. 1.

versus MOHD ZAHID & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. S.H. Nizami and Mr. S.S.

Nizami, Advs along with R-1 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 16.03.2016 After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing the petition on merits but he seeks some time to vacate the property. This proposal has been put to the learned counsel for the respondent/landlord. He is agreeable to grant one year's time to the tenant to vacate the suit property which proposal is accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant under instructions from the petitioner/tenant who is present in person. In view of the aforenoted settlement arrived at between the parties, the petitioner undertakes to vacate the suit property i.e. suit shop No. 2830, measuring 14 ' X 7- 1⁄2 ground floor portion, mohalla niyarian, behind G.B. Road, Delhi as depicted in red colour in the site plan on or before 31.03.2017. In this intervening period, the tenantpetitioner shall continue to pay admitted rate of rent which is Rs.200/- per month to the landlord-respondent. Arrears, if any, shall also be

cleared within a period of one month from today. It is additionally made clear that at the time of handing over vacant and physical possession of the suit property back to the landlord all arrears of water and electricity charges shall be cleared by the tenant-petitioner. All these facts shall be incorporated in an undertaking in the form of an affidavit to be furnished by the tenant-petitioner within a period of two weeks from today with advance copy to the landlordrespondent failing which the landlord-respondent shall be at liberty to execute the decree.

With these directions petition disposed of.

INDERMEET KAUR, J MARCH 16, 2016