Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunil Kakkar And Another vs Raj Bala Sharma on 21 November, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152768
CR-1947-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
CR-1947-2024
Date of decision : 21.11.2024
Col. Sunil Kakkar and another ... Petitioners
Versus
Raj Bala Sharma ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Tarun Vaid, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Joginder S. Dhankhar, Advocate
for the respondent.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the judgment dated 15.12.2022 passed by the Rent Controller, Panchkula, vide which the petitioners have been ordered to vacate the property in question from the demised premises. Challenge is also to the judgment dated 13.12.2023 passed by the Appellate Authority, Panchkula, vide which the appeal filed by the petitioners has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondent have jointly submitted that in the present case, the matter has been amicably settled and it has been decided that the petitioners would hand over the vacant possession of the premises in question to the respondent-landlord on or before 20.02.2025. It is further submitted that the petitioners would keep paying the rent at the agreed rate for the period upto which the petitioners are in possession.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2024 05:59:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152768 CR-1947-2024 2
3. With the consent of both the parties, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:-
i) The petitioners would vacate the premises in question and would hand over the vacant possession to the respondent on or before 20.02.2025.
ii) The petitioners would keep paying the agreed rent by the 10th of every month upto the date the petitioners are in possession.
iii) The petitioners would file an undertaking on the said two aspects before the Executing Court within a period of two weeks from today with an advance copy to counsel for the landlord in the Executing Court.
4. It is made clear that in case the petitioners do not submit the said undertaking or do not comply with any of the abovesaid conditions then it would be open to the respondent to seek immediate possession of the premises in question from the petitioners by applying for police help in addition to taking recourse to other proceedings including the Contempt of Courts Act.
5. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.
(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE November 21, 2024.
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2024 05:59:20 :::