Uma Jain v. Swarn Dutt

ORDER %

29.11.2010 Caveat no.309/2010 Since counsel for the caveator has appeared, notice to the caveator is dispensed with. The caveat stands disposed of. CM No.21256/2010 (exemption) Exemption as prayed for is allowed subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. & CM 21255/2010

(stay) After some arguments, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not pressing the petition on merits and prays that petitioner be given some time to vacate the premises in question. Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. '2_ The counsel for the respondent Is present who submits the respondent has no objection if the petitioner is given time to vacate the suit premises till 30.06.2011 and the respondent will not file the execution petition till 30.06.2011. In view of above statement given by the counsel for parties, the present petition and pending application stand disposed of as not pressed. The petitioner is granted time till

30.06.2011 to vacate the premises in question subject to filing of usual undertaking by the petitioner within two weeks with a copy to the respondent. Renotifyon 23.12.2010. In the meanwhile, the respondent shall not execute the eviction order till the next date of hearing. The parties to appear in person on the next date. VEENA BIRBAL, J NOVEMBER 29, 2010 srb i $-17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + UMA JAIN Petitioner Through: Ms.Anju Lai, Advocate, along with husband of the petitioner. versus SWARN DUTT Respondent Through: Mr.Achal Gupta, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI ORDER %

22.01.2013 CM No.5332/2012 This applicationwas moved by the respondent for issuing the notice to the petitioner on the fresh address.Since learned counsel for the petitioner has put in appearance, application stands disposed of. C.M.No.2820/2012 (for direction) in RC Rev. No.284/2010 This is an application filed by the respondent seeking directions to the petitioner to furnish the details of the deposit of arrears of rent deposited by the petitioner as mentioned in order dated 23.12.2010. Perusal of the record shows that when the revision petition i.e. RC Rev. No.284/2010came up for hearingon29.11.2010,the petitionerlimited his prayerto the extentthathe be givensome time to vacatethe premisesin question. II-On that date, the caveator/respondentalso appeared before the Court and submittedthat he hadno objectionto the petitionerbeinggiventime till

30.06.2011 to vacate the premises and that he will not file the execution petition till 30.06.2011. In view of the submissionsmade by the partiesbeforethe Court,the petitionwas disposedof and petitionerwas grantedtime till 30.06.2011to vacatethe premisesin questionsubjectto filingofusualundertakingby the petitioner within two weeks with copy to respondent and parties were % directedto appearon 23.12.2010. On 23.12.2010an undertakingwas filed by the petitioner,copy of whichwas also suppliedto the respondent. On that date, the petitioneralso handed over to the respondent two bankers cheques amounting to Rs.12000/-each towards the rent from July, 2010 to 30.06.2011. It was submittedby the learnedcounselfor respondentthatthe arrearsofrentprior to July, 2010 had alreadybeen depositedin the Court and learnedcounsel for the petitionersubmittedthat he shall supplythe details of the same to learnedcounselforthe respondentwithina week's time. Sincethe petitionerfailedto supplythe said detailsto the respondent, the present application i.e. CM No. 2820/2012 has been filed by the respondent. Todaylearnedcounselfor the petitioneris presentalongwithhusband of the petitioner, who has brought three Demand Drafts drawn on UCO Banlc total amounting to Rs.1,30,000/- (photocopies of the same are placed on record) in respect of outstanding amount towards arrears of rent. Respondent is not present today. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is unwell and unable to come to the Court today. \ /3 Learned counsel for the respondent received the three demands drafts from the husbandof the petitioneragainstreceipton the photocopyof the demand drafts itself mentioning that now nothing is due from the petitioner. Since the entire payment has been made by the husband of the petitionertothe respondentand nothingis outstandingagainstthe petitioner, no ftartherdirection is required in the matter. The C.M.No.2820/2012 stands disposed of. tBHARANI, J JANUARY 22, 2013 'mr/st'f

49. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + UMAJAIN Petitioner Through: Mr. A.P. Aggarwal with Mr. Y.R. Sharma, Adv. versus SWARN DUTT Respondent Through: Mr. Vinay Bhasin, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Achal Gupta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL