Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arya The Primier Education And Social ... vs Smt. Savita W/O Lakhanlal Gupta Through ... on 28 March, 2025
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:8326
1 SA-1515-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 28th OF MARCH, 2025
SECOND APPEAL No. 1515 of 2019
ARYA THE PRIMIER EDUCATION AND SOCIAL ASSOCIATION
THROUGH PRESIDENT NAEEM KHAN AND OTHERS
Versus
SMT. SAVITA W/O LAKHANLAL GUPTA THROUGH POWER OF
ATTORNEY LAKHANLAL
Appearance:
Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
ORDER
This second appeal has been preferred by the
appellants/defendants/tenants challenging the judgment and decree dated
12.03.2019 passed by Fifth Additional District Judge, Ujjain in regular Civil
Appeal No.16-A/2018 affirming the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2018
passed by Second Civil Judge Class-I, Ujjain in Civil Suit No.114-A/2017
whereby Courts below have concurrently decreed the
respondent/plaintiff/landlord's suit for eviction on the grounds available
under Section 12(1)(a)&(c) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961
(in short "the Act"), which was filed on the grounds under Section 12(1)(a)
(c)&(f) of the Act.
2 . It is pertinent to mention here that upon due consideration of the
material available on record, trial court decreed the suit on all the three
grounds i.e. under Section 12(1)(a)(c)&(f) of the Act and upon filing appeal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:8326
2 SA-1515-2019
by the defendants/appellants, the judgment and decree of trial court was
modified and decree of eviction was upheld on the grounds under Section
12(1)(a)&(c) of the Act.
3 . After arguing at length and taking into consideration the legal
position in respect of concurrent findings recorded by courts below in respect
of arrears of rent and nuisance created by the appellants/defendants by
raising construction of a toilet in the suit premises, learned counsel for the
appellants/defendants prays for withdrawal of this second appeal and prays
for granting 18 months time to vacate the suit accommodation.
4. Taking into consideration the fact that the appeal is pending since
2019 and till now the respondent has not put in appearance and that the
appellants are carrying out educational activities in the suit accommodation,
this Court deems fit to permit the appellants to withdraw the second appeal
by granting time for vacating the tenanted premises upto 30.09.2026 on the
following conditions :-
(i) The appellants/defendants shall vacate the tenanted/suit
accommodation on or before 30.09.2026.
(ii) The appellants/defendants shall regularly pay rent to the
respondent/landlord and shall also clear all the dues, if any, including the
costs of the litigation, if any, imposed by Courts below, within a period of 30
days.
(iii) The appellants/defendants shall not part with the suit
accommodation to anybody and shall not change nature of the same.
(iv) The appellants/defendants shall furnish an undertaking with regard
to the aforesaid conditions within a period of three weeks before the learned
Court below/Executing Court.
(v) If the appellants/defendants fail to comply with any of the
aforesaid conditions, the respondent/plaintiff shall be free to execute the
decree forthwith.
(vi) If after filing of the undertaking, the appellants/defendants do not
vacate the suit accommodation on or before 30.09.2026 and create any
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:8326
3 SA-1515-2019
obstruction, they shall be liable to pay mesne profits of Rs.500/- per day, so
also contempt of order of this Court.
(vii) It is made clear that the defendants/appellants shall not be entitled
for further extension of time after 30.09.2026.
5 . With the aforesaid observations and declining interference in the
judgment and decree of eviction, this second appeal is hereby disposed
off/dismissed.
6. Misc. application(s), pending if any, shall stand closed and interim
order of stay, if any, shall stand vacated.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
ss
