Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 265 (UTT)

Ishtkhar Ali v. Kadambari Devi

2018-05-14

MANOJ K.TIWARI

body2018
JUDGMENT : MANOJ K. TIWARI, J. 1. This is tenant’s revision, under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act, 1987, against the judgment dated 24.02.2016 and decree dated 29.02.2016 passed by learned Judge, SCC/District Judge, Pauri Garhwal in SCC Suit No. 11 of 2013, whereby decree of eviction and arrears of rent was passed against the tenant/revisionist. 2. This Court, while entertaining the revision, stayed the judgment and decree passed by the learned court below vide order dated 01.04.2016 subject to the condition that tenant shall pay decretal amount as well as damages to the landlady and further that tenant shall continue to pay Rs.2,500/- per month for use of occupation of the premises in question. 3. The landlady has filed a counter affidavit in the revision, wherein she has admitted that tenant has deposited a sum of Rs.1,40,000/- as security with her. Sri S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the security amount is refundable to the tenant at the time of handing over the possession of the premises in question. 4. Sri S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the revisionist, after arguing at some length very fairly submits that revisionist is ready to handover vacant and peaceful possession of premises in question to the respondent/landlady, but some reasonable time may be granted to him for the purpose. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/landlady has agreed to grant reasonable time to vacate the premises in question, provided revisionist gives written undertaking that he will vacate the premises in question upon expiry of the time granted for the purpose. 6. Considering the submission of the parties, this Court thinks it appropriate to grant one year time to the revisionist to vacate the premises in question, subject to the condition that he gives a written undertaking to vacate the premises on or before 31.05.2019. 7. It is further made clear that the security amount, so deposited by the revisionist with the landlady/respondent, shall be refunded to the revisionist, after adjusting outstanding amount, if any. It is also made clear that the calculation to this effect shall be made by the Executing Court, in accordance with law. 8. 7. It is further made clear that the security amount, so deposited by the revisionist with the landlady/respondent, shall be refunded to the revisionist, after adjusting outstanding amount, if any. It is also made clear that the calculation to this effect shall be made by the Executing Court, in accordance with law. 8. In view of the above, it is provided, as under: (1) Revisionist shall file an undertaking, within a month, before the court below that he shall vacate the premises in question on or before 31.05.2019 and immediately handover vacant and peaceful possession of the property in question to the respondent. (2) Revisionist will deposit the entire decretal amount before the court below within a period of 60 days from today, subject to adjustment of any amount already deposited before the court below. (3) Revisionist shall continue to pay monthly rent for the use of the premises in question till vacation of the accommodation, on 7th day of each succeeding month. (4) Revisionist shall not induct any other person as tenant in the premises in question. (5) In the event of default of any of the aforesaid conditions, revisionist shall not be entitled to continue in the premises in question upto 31.05.2019 and the decree shall be executed forthwith. 9. With the aforesaid observation and directions, present revision stands disposed of.