WPMS/2115/2019
2021 Latest Caselaw 3307 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  MCC No. 15886 of 2021
                                  In
                                  WPMS No. 2115 of 2019
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Pankaj Chaturvedi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jagdish Chandra Belwal, Advocate for the respondents.

This Writ Petition was decided by the judgement of 25th February, 2020, as a consequence thereto, the proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a), was laid to rest, on the basis of the proposal extended by the petitioner himself, as referred in para 5 of the judgment, and he was granted 1-1/2 years time to vacate the premises, though certain riders were attached to the said direction, laying down the modalities for the remittance of the enhanced rent, which was settled by the judgment dated 25th February, 2020.

At the fag end, when the period granted by this Court, for vacating the premises has arrived, the petitioner has filed an application for extension of time to vacate the premises.

What is surprising is that in the Extension Application, the petitioner himself admits the fact that he has defaulted in remittance of the rent as directed and the same has not been remitted from January, 2021, which otherwise, stands refuted by the learned counsel for the respondents, contending thereof that it is not since January, 2021, but rather since November, 2019, the petitioner has not remitted the rent.

Be that as it may.

Since the findings, which has been recorded in the judgment, the petitioner himself had confined his prayer to vacate the premises and had sought liberty from the Court that further 1-1/2 years time may be granted to him to vacate the premises.

I do not think that it would be an appropriate case, in which, the extension could be granted as prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

But considering the prevalent situation, exclusively only one month's time, from today is granted to the petitioner, to vacate the premises and hand over the vacant and peaceful possession to the heirs of the deceased respondents/landlord.

It goes without saying that the extension of time to vacate the premises would be self- imposition of the direction to remit the rent to the respondents/landlord.

Subject to the above, the Time Extension Application stands disposed of.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 26.08.2021 Shiv