NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10363 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.20260 OF 2017  

@ DIARY NO.12468/2017]

VED PRAKASH APPELLANT(S)

                               VERSUS MUNI LAL RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. The  appellant  approached  the  Rent  Controller, Solan  in  Rent  Petition  No.50/2  of  2001  seeking ejectment of the respondent.  The Rent Controller, Solan  allowed  the  petition.   The  respondent approached  the  Appellate  Authority.   The  Appellate Authority  reversed  the  order  passed  by  the  Rent Controller and allowed the appeal.  The order of the Appellate  Authority  has  been  upheld  by  the  High Court. 4. In the nature of order we propose to pass, we do not think it necessary to call the respondent before this Court, since the relief can be worked out in accordance  with  this  order  before  the  Rent Controller, Solan. 5. When  the  matter  came  up  before  this  Court  on 10.07.2017, this Court passed the following order:-

1

“The petitioner shall get instruction as to  whether  even  after  widening  the  stair case, the petitioner will be in a position to still  accommodate  the  respondent  in  some other part of the building.

List after four weeks.”

6. The said order happened to be passed taking note of the fact that respondent/tenant was a tailor and he  needed  only  minimum  accommodation,  as  has  been noted by the High Court. 7. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr. Sandeep Garg,  son  of  the  appellant/Ved  Prakash,  on  due instruction  from  the  appellant,  is  present  before this  Court.   Learned  counsel  appearing  for  the appellant  and  Mr.  Sandeep  Garg  submits  that  even after  reconstruction  of  the  stair  case,  the respondent can be accommodated so as to continue his tailoring work. 8. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the order needs to be worked out before the Rent Controller.  Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal and set aside all the orders and remit the matter to the Rent Controller, Solan for the limited purpose, as follows:-

i. The appellant shall provide a suitable and  equivalent  space  to  the  respondent, after reconstruction of the stair case, in the same shop.  The reconstruction shall be undertaken only in such a way. ii. The  respondent  shall  be  evicted  only after  the  approval  of  the  plan  for reconstruction of the stair case.

2

9. The Rent Controller will issue fresh notice to the parties for working out this order. 10. Pending  applications,  if  any,  shall  stand disposed of. 11. There shall be no orders as to costs.

.......................J.               [KURIAN JOSEPH]  

.......................J.               [R. BANUMATHI]  

NEW DELHI; AUGUST 09, 2017.

3