HARINDER SINGH UPPAL Vs. SUMAN GOEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of a judgment and decree passed by the Court of additional District Judge, Delhi in a suit for possession of a shop and payment of arrears of rent/damages etc. The Court below has come to the conclusion that the premises, in question, is not covered by the provisions of The Delhi Rent control Act, 1958 and that the tenancy of the defendant/appellant having been validly terminated, he has no justification to stay in possession. The Court has also found the plaintiff/respondent entitled to the arrears of rent of rs. 1,51,528/- with interest @ 9% per annum calculated from the date of filing of the suit till realization. When the appeal came up for hearing before us today after arguing the matter at considerable length, the parties have with the assistance of their respective counsel arrived at a mutually agreeable settlement. The settlement envisages payment of a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- by the respondent-landlord to the appellant whereupon the appellant has agreed to vacate the premises unconditionally and without demur. Statements of the appellant and the respondent in this regard have been separately recorded by us. In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the settlement is perfectly lawful, we see no reason why a decree in terms thereof cannot be passed in modification of the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. We, accordingly, dispose of the appeal with the following directions:-