S N Bhatt (Sachida Nand ) vs. Vijai Shri (P) LTD

Held

The Court accepted the undertaking given by the petitioner. The petitioner undertook to vacate and hand over peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent on or before July 31, 2021. The petitioner also undertook to pay use and occupation charges at the agreed rate of rent, along with interest in GST, until the premises are vacated. Furthermore, the petitioner committed to clearing all outstanding water, electricity, and other dues before vacating and not to sublet, assign, part with possession, or cause damage to the premises. The respondent accepted this undertaking. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn. The execution of the impugned order dated January 22, 2019, was stayed until July 31, 2021, subject to the petitioner filing an affidavit of their undertaking within two weeks. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, as the matter was settled by the parties' consent and undertakings.

Facts

The petitioner, S N Bhatt, challenged an order dated January 22, 2019, passed by the Rent Controller, which dismissed the petitioner's application for leave to defend and granted an eviction order. The eviction petition was filed by the respondent, Vijai Shri (P) Ltd., seeking possession of Shop no.7, 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 petitioner's counsel sought to withdraw the petition, undertaking to vacate the premises by July 31, 2021, and to pay use and occupation charges, including interest in GST, at the agreed rate of rent until possession is handed over. The petitioner also undertook to clear all outstanding utility bills and not to sublet, assign, or damage the premises. The respondent noted that rent had not been paid since October 1, 2010, but the petitioner stated rent had been paid or deposited and undertook to clear any arrears within two months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's undertaking to vacate the premises by July 31, 2021, and to pay use and occupation charges, including interest in GST, is acceptable to the respondent and the Court, thereby allowing the withdrawal of the petition. (Mixed question of law and fact, relating to the conduct of the parties and the terms of settlement under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner, through their counsel, sought to withdraw the petition and provided a comprehensive undertaking regarding vacation of the premises, payment of charges, and maintenance. Respondent's arguments: The respondent initially pointed out the non-payment of rent since October 1, 2010. However, upon the petitioner's undertaking to clear arrears and provide proof of payment/deposit, the respondent accepted the undertaking. The respondent's counsel stated that the undertaking was acceptable to the respondent.