High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/6517/2014disposed of

Jai Dial v. Barjinder Mohan Singh Bedi

2015-01-29Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj3 pages

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Civil Revision No.6517 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 29, 2015.

Jai Dial ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

Barjinder Mohan Singh Bedi ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Petitioner in person with Mr. Krishan Singh Dadwal, Advocate.

Ms. Jaideep Kaur, Advocate for the respondent.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

Notice was issued to the respondent on the last date to inquire as to whether he is ready to give reasonable time to revision petitioner to vacate the demised premises. Order dated 02.12.2014 reads as follows:- "After arguing at length, learned counsel for the petitioner after consulting the revision petitioner, who is present in the Court, submits that he does not intend to press this petition on merits. He submits that petitioner is running his business in the demised shop for the last about 45 years and required some time to find alternate accommodation. He confines his request for

-2grant of some reasonable time to the revision petitioner to vacate the demised premises and hand over the possession to the respondent-landlord.

To this limited extent, notice of motion for 29.01.2015.

Till then, the execution of the ejectment order passed by the Rent Controller, if not already executed, shall remain stayed subject to the conditions that petitioner will pay/deposit the entire arrears of rent/mesne profits upto 31st December, 2014 within two weeks and pay/deposit the rent/mesne profits for the next month on or before 7th day of January, 2015." Ms. Jaideep Kaur, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, after consulting the revision petitioner, who is present in the Court, seeks reasonable time to vacate the demised shop, submitting that revision petitioner is running his business in the demised shop for the last 45 years. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent submits that the respondent has no objection if nine months' time be allowed to the revision petitioner to vacate the demised premises, as he has already delayed the ejectment by eight years after filing of petition in the year 2007.

In view of submission made by learned counsel for both the sides, the petition is disposed of and the revision petitioner is allowed

-3time upto 28.10.2015 to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent subject to the conditions as incorporated in the order dated 02.12.2014. The revision petitioner will also file affidavit before the executing Court giving undertaking to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent on or before 28.10.2015.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) January 29, 2015.

JUDGE Sachin M.