Mohd. Shahid & Ors. vs Qureshia Begam
2019 Latest Caselaw 4752 Del

$~36

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 01.10.2019

+      RC.REV. 603/2016 & CM APPL. 21948/2017 & 23011/2017
       & 28644/2017
MOHD SHAHID & ORS.                                       ..... Petitioners

                          versus

QURESHIA BEGAM                                        ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner:       Mr. R.L. Kohli, Advocate

For the Respondent:       Ms. Deepika V. Marwaha, Ms. Worthing Kasar,
                          Mr. Alok Pandey and Ms. Paunika Johar, Advocates
                          for R-1(a) & (b)

                          Mr. Lalit Gupta and Mr. Himank Ahuja, Advocate
                          for R-1 (e)

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 23.08.2016, whereby the Leave to defend application of the petitioner has been dismissed by the Rent Controller 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 room/store on the ground floor along with right of entire inside wala dalan with kothri adjacent to the dalan on the ground floor and common open courtyard and common toilet situated at property No. 2192, Gali Nal Wali, Pahari Bhojia, Bazar Chitii Qabar, Turkman Gate, Delhi - 110 006, 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 30.09.2020. Petitioner further undertakes that he shall pay Rs. 5000/- 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 30.09.2020.

5. Petitioner further undertakes that he shall clear all water, electricity and other dues/charges in respect of the tenanted premises before he vacates the premises. He further undertakes that he shall not sublet, assign or part with the possession of the entire or any portion of the tenanted premises to any third party. He further

undertakes that he shall not cause any damage to the tenanted premises and shall handover the same in the condition as it exists today, subject to normal wear and tear.

6. Petitioner further undertakes that he shall not block the common passage.

7. The undertaking is accepted.

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

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 In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

10. Subject to petitioner filing an affidavit of undertaking in the above terms within a period of two weeks from today, execution of the impugned order dated 23.08.2016 shall remain stayed till 30.09.2020.

11. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J, OCTOBER 01, 2019 'rs'