Delhi High Court
Satish Kumar vs Ashok Kumar Bhalla on 17 October, 2019
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 17.10.2019
+ RC.REV. 333/2018
SATISH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
versus
ASHOK KUMAR BHALLA ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Tamli Wad
and Mr. Aditya Mishra, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Abhishek Singh with Mr. Amit Bhalla, Mr. Shreshth
Anga, Mr. Surjeet S. Malhotra and Mr. Ankit Khanna,
Advocates.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
RC.REV. 333/2018 & CM APPL.29182/2018 (stay), CM APPL.
23337/2019 (for directions)
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 10.04.2018, whereby leave to defend
application of the petitioner has been dismissed and an eviction order
passed.
2. Subject eviction petition was filed by the respondent seeking
eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section
14(1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 from a shop bearing Private
No.8, situated at Ground Floor of Property bearing Municipal No.M-73,
RC.REV.333/2018 page 1 of 3
Greater Kailash, Part -I, Main Market, New Delhi, more particularly as
shown in red colour in the site plan attached to the eviction petition.
3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submit that since Mr. Satish
Kumar - petitioner is unwell, he has executed a General Power of Attorney
in favour of Mr. Anoop Anand dated 30.07.2019. Copy of the Power of
Attorney has been placed on record. Original Power of Attorney has been
produced in Court for perusal.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that
Mr. Anoop Anand and Ms. Shyamali Anand, wife of Mr. Anoop Anand are
carrying on business as franchisees of Mr. Satish Kumar.
5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, under instructions from
Mr. Anoop Anand, appearing as General Power of Attorney of the
Petitioner, seeks leave to withdraw the petition.
6. Mr. Anoop Anand, who is present in Court in person, undertakes on
behalf of Mr. Satish Kumar, himself and Ms. Shyamali Anand that they
shall vacate and handover the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted
premises to the respondent on or before 31.08.2023. He further undertakes
that they shall pay a sum of Rs.65,000/- per month as use and occupation
charges with effect from 01.09.2019 till the time they hand over the
peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or
before 31.08.2023. He further undertakes that they shall clear the arrears
of Rs.3 lakhs within a period of 4 months from today.
7. He further undertakes that they shall clear all water, electricity and
other dues/charges in respect of the tenanted premises before he vacates the
RC.REV.333/2018 page 2 of 3
premises on or before 31.08.2023. He further undertakes that they shall not
sublet, assign or part with the possession of the tenanted premises of any
part thereof. He further undertakes that they shall not cause any damage to
the tenanted premises and shall hand over the peaceful and vacant
possession of the tenanted premises in the same condition as it exists today
subject to normal wear and tear.
8. The undertaking is accepted.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent, under instructions from the
respondent submits that the undertaking is also acceptable to the
respondent.
10. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
11. Subject to petitioner, Mr. Anoop Anand and Ms Shyamali Anand
filing affidavits of undertaking in the above terms within a period of two
weeks from today, execution of the impugned order dated 10.04.2018 shall
remain stayed till 31.08.2023.
12. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
OCTOBER 17, 2019
st
RC.REV.333/2018 page 3 of 3
