27 July 2017
Supreme Court
Download

KHUBI RAM Vs LALIT MOHAN

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH, HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
Judgment by: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
Case number: C.A. No.-001923-001923 / 2010
Diary number: 25803 / 2009
Advocates: SURYA KANT Vs DINESH KUMAR GARG


1

1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1923 OF 2010

KHUBI RAM APPELLANT

VERSUS LALIT MOHAN RESPONDENT

J U D G M E N T  KURIAN, J. 1. The appellant, who is the tenant, is before this Court aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.46048/2000 whereby the order delivered by  the  first  appellate  authority  in  the  eviction matter has been confirmed.   2. The dispute only pertains to the arrears of rent. The Rent Controller has taken a view that the non-deposit of a portion of the arrears claimed is on  account  of  mistake  of  fact.  However,  that contention has not been accepted by the High Court. We are informed that the appellant and his wife are both  handicapped  and  that  they  have  a  small tailoring  shop  and  that  they  have  unmarried

2

2

daughters. 3. The respondent is a Doctor who has retired from  Government  service  and  the  wife  of  the respondent is also a Doctor who is retiring shortly. The  respondent,  who  is  present  before  this  Court today submits that their children are married and settled in life, however, they require the premises for setting up a clinic. It is submitted that one tenant  has  already  vacated  the  premises  and settlement talks are going on with another tenant for vacating the premises.   4. Be that as it may, having regard to the fact that the appellant is engaged in a small tailoring shop and that he has unmarried daughters as well, and since one more tenant of the premises is yet to be evicted, we find it is only just and fair that reasonable  time  to  settle  elsewhere  is  granted, particularly,  taking  note  of  the  fact  that  the entire family is residing within that premises only. 5. Accordingly,  the  Appeal  is  dismissed  but granting time to the appellant to surrender vacant possession of the premises to the respondent on or before 1st May, 2019.   6. We  make  it  clear  that  there  shall  be  no

3

3

further extension of time on any ground. 7. The appellant shall also file an undertaking on usual terms before this Court within four weeks.

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

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

JULY 27, 2017; NEW DELHI.