Delhi High Court
Vikram Vasudeva vs Sanjay Saxena on 1 September, 2020
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 01.09.2020
+ CM(M) 402/2020
VIKRAM VASUDEVA ..... Petitioner
versus
SANJAY SAXENA ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Apoorv Aggarwal with Ms. Riya Thomas and
Ms. Akanksha Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondent: None. (exparty)
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL.17585/2020 (exemption from filing original documents
and dim annexures) & CM APPL.21276/2020 (exemption from
attestation)
Exemptions are allowed subject to all just exceptions. The duly
attested copy of affidavits shall be filed within one week of the
resumption of the regular functioning of the Court.
CM(M) 402/2020
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks appointment of an officer/direction to an officer
of the Court to physically evict the respondent from the front side
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
portion of the property bearing No.A-1/12 in Block A, Shanti Niketan,
New Delhi comprising of ground floor and first floor Duplex along
with four car parking space inside the premises.
3. It is contended that petitioner had approached the executing
Court for issuance of warrants of possession, however, since the
process of appointment of Bailiff was not functional, the executing
Court simplicitor adjourned the case and directed that the same shall
be taken up after the opening of the Courts.
4. Petitioner had let out the front side portion of the Bungalow
comprising of ground floor and first floor duplex measuring 600
square yards along with four car parking space inside the space of the
subject property to the respondent by a Rent Deed dated 05.09.2018
on a monthly rent of Rs.3 lakhs per month.
5. It is contended that the respondent defaulted in payment of rent
and accordingly a Suit for possession and for recovery of arrears of
rent was filed.
6. The Trial Court in its order dated 17.12.2019 noticed that
respondent had entered appearance in the Suit and on 11.10.2019
stated that he was ready to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.30 lakhs in
three instalments.
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
7. On 30.11.2019, respondent tendered the first instalment by way
of a cheque dated 05.12.2019, however, the cheque when deposited
was dishonoured for the reasons of insufficient funds.
8. Since neither the written statement was filed nor arrears were
paid in terms of the statement given on 11.10.2019, the Trial Court on
17.12.2019 pronounced judgment under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC and
passed a decree of possession as well as of arrears of rent.
9. Respondent filed an appeal before this Court, being RFA No.
197/2020. Said RFA No. 197/2020 was disposed of by order dated
30.04.2020.
10. This Court in its order dated 30.04.2020 noted the contentions
of the respondent, who was present before the Court, that he
admittedly had defaulted in payment of the rent and did not press the
appeal on merits but prayed for time to vacate the premises. His
statement was recorded to the effect that if he was granted time till
15.06.2020, he would clear the entire up-to-date arrears of rent along
with all pending maintenance and electricity charges on or before
15.06.2020 and further undertook to vacate the premises on or before
31.10.2020.
11. The undertaking was accepted and he was directed to file an
affidavit of undertaking within a period of 3 days and to pay a sum of
Rs.10 lakhs to the petitioner.
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
12. After the order was pronounced, respondent filed an application
seeking recall of order on the ground that due to connectivity issue,
during video conferencing hearing, he was prevented from hearing the
complete order, accordingly, he sought to resile from his undertaking
given to the Court.
13. This Court by order dated 20.05.2020, noted that though it was
not satisfied with the contentions of the respondent, however in the
interest of justice recalled its order dated 30.04.2020 and thereafter
considered the appeal of the respondent on merits.
14. After consideration of the appeal on merits, this Court thereafter
rejected the appeal. The Court noticed in the order dated 20.05.2020
that lengthy arguments were addressed by the counsel for the
respondent but when judgment was being dictated in the presence of
the counsel through video conferencing, the counsel for the
respondent curiously was found missing in the last few minutes. The
dictation was deferred for a few minutes to await the counsel for the
respondent to reconnect, however, he did not do so. Thereafter the
appeal was dismissed on merits with costs of Rs.1 lakh.
15. When the petitioner applied to the executing Court for
execution of the decree and possession, the executing Court by its
order dated 24.07.2020, impugned herein, has deferred the
proceedings on the ground that the Nazarat Branch was not functional
and the process of appointment of Bailiff was also not functional and
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
accordingly, deferred the application to be taken up after opening of
the Courts.
16. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner has filed the present
petition seeking appointment of an officer to execute the judgment
and decree dated 17.12.2019.
17. This petition was taken up on 04.08.2020, when counsel for the
respondent entered appearance and accepted notice and stated that
settlement talks were on and prayed for an adjournment to place on
record the settlement terms. The case was adjourned to 20.08.2020.
18. On 20.08.2020, counsel for the respondent stated that though he
had entered appearance on 04.08.2020 on behalf of the respondent,
however, he had been specifically instructed by the respondent not to
appear in the matter and had been discharged.
19. In view of the above statement of counsel for the respondent
and also failure of anybody to appear on behalf of the respondent,
respondent was proceeded ex-parte on 20.08.2020. Thereafter the
case was taken up on 24.08.2020, 28.08.2020 and today. However,
none has appeared for the respondent till date.
20. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record a site
plan of the Suit property as Annexure A-5 with the additional
documents. The site plan depicts the front portion of the property and
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
the same is marked as 'A' and the rear portion of the property is
marked as 'B'.
21. Learned counsel for the petitioner under instructions submits
that the potion marked as 'A', i.e., the tenanted premises is lying
vacant and there are no articles lying in the said premises of the
respondent.
22. Keeping in view the conduct of the respondent as is evident
from the above orders, I deem it expedient to appoint a Local
Commissioner to execute the judgment and decree dated 17.12.2019.
23. Accordingly, Ms. Shubham Mahajan, Advocate (Mobile # + 91
9711679754) (email [email protected]) is appointed as
the Local Commissioner to visit the property and execute the
judgment and decree dated 17.12.2019.
24. Local Commissioner shall obtain peaceful and vacant
possession of the tenanted premises comprising of ground floor and
first floor Duplex along with four car parking space inside the
property bearing No.A-1/12 in Block A, Shanti Niketan, New Delhi
marked as "A" in the Site Plan annexed as Annexure A-5 of the
additional documents.
25. If the property is found locked, the Local Commissioner shall
have the locks opened or break open the lock of the premises and
obtain possession.
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
26. In case there are any articles or furniture of the Respondent
lying in the property, Local Commissioner shall make an inventory of
the same and handed over the same to the petitioner on superdari.
Petitioner shall provide space for storage of the said articles.
Petitioner shall not deal with the said articles and shall be responsible
for their safe keep till further orders from the Court.
27. After the premises are vacated, Local Commissioner shall
deliver the peaceful vacant possession of the said premises to the
petitioner.
28. Local Commissioner shall videograph the entire process and
take photographs.
29. Local Commissioner shall file a status report within one week
of the execution of the order.
30. Local Commissioner shall be paid a fee of Rs. 75,000/- to be
borne by the petitioner.
31. Petition is, accordingly, allowed in the above terms.
32. List for reporting compliance on 15.09.2020.
33. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
SEPTEMBER 01, 2020/st SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:01.09.2020 18:57:29
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
