Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LRS OF KRISHAN JINDAL versus LRS OF D.N.RAI

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LRS OF KRISHAN JINDAL v LRS OF D.N.RAI - CSA Case No. 12 of 2005 [2005] RD-RJ 564 (11 March 2005)

S.B. CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO. 12/2005

LRS OF KRISHAN JINDAL

VS

LRS OF DR. D.N. RAI

DATE OF ORDER : 11.3.2005

HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA,J

Mr. R.K.Thanvi, for the appellant.

Mr. M.D.Boob, for the respondent.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on only the question of granting the time, which may be given to the appellant for vacating the premises in dispute.

Learned counsel for the appellant sought time of two years', but learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff submits that even the legal representative of respondent is also senior citizen and, therefore, no time be granted as six months have already passed from the decree under challenge.

Looking to the facts of the case, it will be just and proper to grant some time to the appellant to vacate the premises. This court deems it proper that appellant may be granted time upto 30th Sept., 2005 to vacate the premises as giving more time will not be just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case. Therefore, the decree under challenge shall not be executed till 1st Oct., 2005 in case the appellant furnishes written undertaking before the trial court that appellant shall vacate the premises on or before 30th Sept., 2005 and shall hand over the vacant possession to the respondent-landlord and shall pay all the decretal amount as well as arrears of rent, if due, and shall further pay the rent to the landlord till the appellant vacates the premises in question. The arrears of rent shall be paid within a period of one month from today and the subsequent rent be paid by 15th day of each succeeding calender month. The appellant shall have also not part with possession and sub-letted the premises in dispute during this period.

With these concessions, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.

(PRAKASH TATIA),J. c.p.goyal/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.