Unknown vs Harish Chandra
2022 Latest Caselaw 3358 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                     17th OCTOBER, 2022

                CIVIL REVISION No. 62 of 2011

Between:

Harish Chandra Joshi.                               ...Revisionist


and

Smt. Indira Vaish.                                ...Respondent


Counsel for the Revisionist    :     Mr. Piyush Garg, learned
                                    counsel.

Counsel for the Respondent      :    Mr. Tapan Singh, learned
                                     counsel.


Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present SCC Revision has been filed under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, against the judgment and decree dated 20.08.2011, passed by the learned Small Cause Court/Additional District Judge/Ist F.T.C., Haldwani, District Nainital, in SCC Suit No. 01 of 2001 "Smt. Indira Vaish Vs. Harish Chandra Joshi", whereby, suit for eviction, arrears of rent and damages has been allowed.

2. During the pendency of the present revision, the revisionist has filed an application to withdraw the present revision by granting some reasonable time to the revisionist to vacate the shop-in-question.

3. Against the said application (IA No. 11210 of 2022), the responded filed her objection.

4. Heard Mr. Piyush Garg, the learned counsel for the revisionist and Mr. Tapan Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent.

5. Today, the said objection is not pressed by the learned counsel for the respondent. Therefore, the said objection, filed by the respondent, is rejected, as not pressed.

6. Today, Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the revisionist, submitted that the revisionist, namely, Harish Chandra Joshi undertakes to vacate the shop-in-question by 28.02.2023. The learned counsel for the revisionist further submitted that the mesne profit, as directed by the learned Trial Court, shall be deposited/paid by the revisionist.

7. Mr. Tapan Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent, has no objection on the said undertakings.

8. Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that on the said oral undertakings, the present revision may be decided.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the revisionist may not be evicted from the shop-in-question till 28.02.2023 provided he deposits/pays the mesne profit as directed by the Trial Court. The revisionist is further directed to vacate the shop-in-question and hand over the vacant possession of the said shop-in-question to the respondent on or before 28.02.2023.

10. In case of default in payment of mesne profit, the revisionist shall be liable to vacate the shop-in- question even before 28.02.2023, but according to law.

11. The present SSC Revision is disposed of accordingly.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dated: 17.10.2022 PN/-