Swaroop Singh Rawat vs. Shree Arya Dharma Sewa Sangh
Facts
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dismissing their civil revision. The civil revision was filed against a decree in favour of the plaintiff/respondent. The petitioners sought a two-year extension to vacate the demised property. The Administrator of Shree Arya Dharma Sewa Sangh, representing the respondent, agreed to grant the two-year extension, provided the rent was paid at the current market rate. The parties reached a consensus on the terms for vacating the property.
Held
The Court held that the impugned judgments and orders passed by the courts below would stand confirmed. The petitioners were granted time to vacate and hand over possession of the shop to the landlord (respondent) on or before September 11, 2027, without further extension. An undertaking to this effect was to be filed by the petitioners before the executing court. The petitioners were directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month, inclusive of GST, from September 1, 2025, for the use and occupation of the shop. The petitioners were also restrained from creating third-party interest in the shop or initiating fresh proceedings on the same cause of action. The Court clarified that any violation of these conditions would disentitle the petitioners to the protection of this order, making them liable for immediate eviction.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to an extension of time to vacate the demised property, and if so, for what duration and under what conditions? The petitioners argued for a two-year extension to vacate the property. The respondent, through its Administrator, agreed to grant the extension but stipulated that the rent payment should be at the current market rate. The court had to determine the terms of this extension, considering the consensus reached between the parties regarding the rent amount and the timeline for vacating the premises.
Sections Cited
None
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
p
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No.2647 of 2021 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Lalit Samant, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. I.P. Kohli, Advocate for the respondent.
Mr. Vinod Kumar Mishra, Administrator of Shree Arya Dharma Sewa Sangh, Birla Mandir Marg, New Delhi is present before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff/respondent and the civil revision there against was dismissed.
Feeling aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the civil revision, the petitioners are before this Court in present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Learned counsel for the petitioners innocuously prayed for grant of some time to vacate the demised property. He prayed for time for two years to vacate the property.
Mr. Vinod Kumar Mishra, Administrator of Shree Arya Dharma Sewa Sangh is present before this Court being duly identified by his counsel Mr. I.P. Kohli. Mr. Mishra is ready, if the time of two years is granted t
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.