Vikram Nath, J.;- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pavan Kumar, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.1. Both the Courts below have recorded concurrent findings, both on the question of bonafide need and comparative hardship in favour of the landlord. On a perusal of the orders it is apparent that said findings are based upon consideration of material evidence on record. The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner that additional evidence led at the appellate stage has not been considered by the Appellate Authority is not borne out from the record, rather it is contrary to the record. The Appellate Authority has dealt with the additional evidence led before it and even after consideration of the same has recorded the findings that the bonafide need of the landlord still survives and further that landlord would suffer greater hardship in case the premises were not released. In view of the above I do not find any merit in the petition warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Petition is accordingly dismissed. At this stage Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has made request for a reasonable time being allowed to the petitioner to vacate the premises in question. Although he prays for a year's time but Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 has agreed to only three months being allowed. He has submitted that the proceedings are pending since 1986, for almost 25 years. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of the Court, four months time or to round up till 8th May, 2012 would be a reasonable time for the petitioner to vacate the premises subject to the following conditions being fulfilled- 1.The tenant-petitioner files before concerned Court, on or before 10th February, 2012, an application along with his affidavit giving an unconditional undertaking to comply with all the conditions mentioned hereinafter: 2.The Tenant-petitioner shall not be evicted from the accommodation in his tenancy up to 8th May, 2012. Tenant-petitioners, his representative/assignee, etc, claiming through him or otherwise, if any, shall vacate without objection and peacefully deliver vacant possession of the accommodation in question on or before 8th May, 2012 to the landlord or landlord's nominee/representative (if any, appointed and intimated by the landlord) by giving prior advance notice and notifying to the landlord by Registered A.D post (on his last known address or as may be disclosed in advance by the landlord in writing before the concerned Court) time and date on which Landlord is to take possession from the tenant. 3.Petitioner shall on or before 10th February, 2012 deposit entire amount due towards rent etc. up to date i.e. entire arrears of the past, if any, as well as the rent for the period ending on the 8th May, 2012. 4.Petitioner and everyone claiming under him undertakes not to 'change' or 'damage' or transfer/alienate/assign in any manner, the accommodation in question. 5.In case tenant-petitioners fail to comply with any of the conditions/or direction/s contained in this order, landlord shall be entitled to evict the tenant-petitioners forthwith from the accommodation in question by seeking police force through concerned Court. 6.If there is violation of the under taking of anyone or more of the conditions contained in this order, the defaulting party shall pay Rs.25000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) as damages to the other party besides rendering himself/herself liable to be prosecuted for committing grossest contempt of the Court.