Brij Mohan Aggarwal vs Ramesh Vimal (Deceased) Thr Lrs
2020 Latest Caselaw 217 Del

$~16

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                Judgment delivered on: 14.01.2020

+      RC.REV. 688/2019 & CM APPL. 52696/2019, CM APPL.
       52698/2019

BRIJ MOHAN AGGARWAL                                    ..... Petitioner
                                 versus

RAMESH VIMAL (DECEASED) THR LRS                        ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner:       Mr. Kunal Kalra, Advocate.

For the Respondent:       Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, Advocate.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 30.07.2019, whereby the Leave to defend application of the petitioner has been 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 with regard to private No.1 in property bearing No.1825, Uday Chand Marg, Kotla

Mubarakpur, 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 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 30.11.2020. Petitioner further undertakes that petitioner shall pay use and occupation charges at the rate of Rs. 3500/- per month with effect from 01.02.2020 till the time he hands over the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before 30.11.2020.

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 tenanted premises or any part thereof. He further undertakes that he shall not cause any damage to the tenanted premises and shall hand over the possession of the same in the 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 affidavit of undertaking in the above terms within a period of two weeks from today, execution of the impugned order dated 30.07.2019 shall remain stayed till 30.11.2020.

10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

JANUARY 14, 2020 rk