ARYA SHIKSHA SAMITI Vs. AMAR NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act on behalf of a registered Society Arya Shiksha Samiti through its Secretary, Shri Prem Raj Sharma against Sh. Amar Nath and Sh. Kishore Lal for having violated the undertaking given to this court by Shri Kishore Lal to vacate certain premises by 26th February, 1981 and for failure to pay the rent for the period 17th January, 1972 till the end of May, 1976 within three months thereof and to pay future rent from June, 1976 by the 15th of next English Calender month.

(2.) The petition for contempt came to be filed in the following circumstances :- The petitioner-society filed a petition for eviction against Amar Nath and Kishore Lal under Section 22 of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The case of the society was that these premises were required for furtherance of the activities of the society and on that ground the orders for ejectment were passed by Avadh Behari, J. on the statement of Kishori Lal on behalf of the tenant and on the statement of Shri Anand Prakash Sharma as Vice-President of the Society who were appellants before this Court in the said appeal. In the compromise the parties had agreed that an order for eviction may be passed against the tenants but the order will not be executable till the expiry of five years from the date of the compromise. In the compromise, it was also stated that the tenant will pay the arrears of rent for the period 17-1-1972 till the end of May, 1976 at the rate of Rs. 80.00 per month within three months from the date of the order and future rent had to be paid by 15th of next month.

(3.) The case of the petitioner-society is that the rent was not paid in pursuance of the alleged undertaking. This application for taking contempt was filed in this Court on 14th January, 1981. That means the petition was filed before even the time had expired for vacation of the premises. Therefore, this petition so far as it now sought to be proceeded for failure of delivery of possession is premature.