SEASON BHANDARI Vs. VISAKHA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 9.2.2017 passed by the Executing Court, Jalandhar whereby the objections filed by the petitioners who are children of Rajinder Kumar were dismissed.

(2.) The reasoning given by the Executing Court is on account of the fact that the statement had been given on 3.12012 (Annexure P/3) by the attorney of judgment debtor no.1, who is their father that they would vacate the demise shop by 1.12015 and payment of rent would also be made upto that date. In execution the judgment debtors and the legal representatives were reluctant to vacate the demised shop and accordingly warrants of possession were issued regarding the shop in question by referring the matter to the District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that the petitioners are the children of Sunita, who had expired on 25.5.2016 and she was a co-tenant along with Chaman Lal Bhandari-proforma respondent before this Court and she had never made any statement as such to vacate the shop in question and neither she had put in appearance before the Rent Controller, Jalandhar. Therefore, it is submitted that the present petitioners are not bound to abide by the undertaking given on the earlier occasion and the statement made before the Lok Adalat would not constitute an award as per Rule 17 of the National Legal Services Authority Notification (Lok Adalats) Regulation, 2009 since the petition was withdrawn.