Purshottam Anand vs Suraj Prakash Wahi
2019 Latest Caselaw 5767 Del

$~12

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 19.11.2019

+      RC.REV. 253/2016
PURSHOTTAM ANAND                                             ..... Petitioner
                                   versus

SURAJ PRAKASH WAHI                                         ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Advocate with petitioner in person.

For the Respondent: Mr. Viney Sharma and Mr. Sahil Talwar, Advocates with
                    respondent in person.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                               JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 23.12.2015, whereby the leave to defend application of the petitioner was dismissed and an eviction order passed.

2. Respondent had filed the subject eviction petition seeking eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 from one private shop bearing No. 1 out of property bearing No. GL/8, Municipal No. WZ-297 situated at G Block, Jail Road, Hari Nagar, New Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan attached to the

eviction petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner under instructions from the petitioner who is present in Court in person, seeks leave to withdraw the petition.

4. Petitioner who is present in Court in person, undertakes that he shall vacate and handover the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 30.05.2021. Petitioner further undertakes that he shall pay a sum pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as use and occupation charges till the time he hands over the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 30.05.2021.

5. Petitioner further undertakes that he shall clear all water, electricity and other dues/charges in respect of the tenanted premises before they vacate the premises on or before 30.05.2021. He further undertakes that he shall not sublet, assign or part with the possession of the tenanted premises or any part thereof. He further undertakes that he shall not cause any damage to the tenanted premises and hand over the possession of the same to the Respondent in the same condition as it exists today subject to normal wear and tear.

6. The undertaking is accepted.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent under instructions from the respondent submits that the undertaking is also acceptable to the

respondent.

8. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

9. Subject to petitioner filing an affidavit of undertaking in the above terms within a period of four weeks from today, execution of the impugned order dated 23.12.2015 shall remain stayed till 30.05.2021.

10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J NOVEMBER 19, 2019 'rs'