Shyam Lal & Anr vs. Vijai Shri (P) LTD

Held

The Court accepted the undertakings given by the petitioners. Petitioner No. 2, present in person, undertook to vacate and hand over peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before July 31, 2021. The petitioners further undertook to pay use and occupation charges at the agreed rate of rent, plus interest in GST, until they hand over possession. They also undertook to clear all water, electricity, and other dues before vacating, and not to sublet, assign, or part with possession, nor cause any damage to the premises. The petitioners also undertook to clear rent arrears within two months from the date of the order, and to furnish proof of payment/deposit for periods where rent was not paid or deposited. The respondent accepted these undertakings. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The execution of the impugned order dated January 22, 2019, was stayed until July 31, 2021, subject to the petitioners filing an affidavit of their undertaking within two weeks.

Facts

The petitioners challenged an order dated January 22, 2019, passed by the Rent Controller, which dismissed their application for leave to defend and granted an eviction order. The eviction petition was filed by the respondent (Vijai Shri (P) Ltd.) seeking eviction of the petitioners from Shop No. 1, Liberty Cinema Building, New Rohtak Road, New Delhi, on the grounds of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The petitioners, under instructions from Petitioner No. 2 present in court, sought to withdraw the petition. Petitioner No. 2 undertook to vacate the premises by July 31, 2021, pay use and occupation charges at the agreed rate of rent plus interest in GST until vacation, clear all utility dues, and not sublet or damage the premises.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners should be granted leave to withdraw the revision petition, and if so, under what terms and conditions? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners, through their counsel and with Petitioner No. 2 present in court, sought to withdraw the revision petition. They provided several undertakings regarding vacating the premises, payment of charges, and clearing dues. They also contended that rent had been paid or deposited and offered to furnish proof, and undertook to clear any arrears within two months. Respondent's Argument: The respondent's counsel, under instructions, submitted that the petitioners had not paid rent since October 1, 2010. However, they accepted the undertakings provided by the petitioners regarding vacating the premises and payment of charges, subject to the filing of an affidavit of undertaking.