SUBHASH CHANDER Vs. NAND LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this revision, petitioners have laid challenge to order dtd. 24/7/2019 (Annexure P-16) whereby Executing Court, has directed them to vacate the demised shop within a week, upon deposit of FDRs by the respondents-landlord which un-disputedly, have already been deposited.

(2.) Briefly, contesting respondents No. 1 and 2 filed various eviction petitions against the petitioners. However, the same are not relevant for decision of this revision, inasmuch as, this revision only pertains to Rent Petition No. 15 instituted on 17/4/2005 and decided on 8/4/2014, whereby learned Rent Controller, accepting eviction petition of contesting respondents No. 1 and 2, on the ground of bona fide personal necessity and non-payment of rent directed the petitioners to vacate the demised shop within two months.

(3.) Being aggrieved, the petitioners approached the Appellate Authority. During its pendency, compromise (Ex. C-l) dtd. 26/7/2017 (Annexure P-l) arrived at between the parties, whereby the petitioners undertook to vacate the demised shop on or before 1/2/2019 with stipulation that in case, they do not vacate the same, they shall pay Rs.20,000.00 per month w.e.f. 8/8/2017 till vacation of the shop. It was also agreed between them that contesting respondents No. 1 and 2 would withdraw the entire amount deposited by the petitioners in various Courts towards arrears of rent, wherein petitioners shall have no objection. Pursuant to the aforesaid compromise, petitioners got their appeal dismissed as withdrawn vide order dtd. 10/8/2017 (Annexure P-5), but did not vacate the demised shop in utter violation of their undertaking on 1/2/2019. Consequently, respondents No. 1 and 2 filed Execution Application (Annexure P-7) for eviction of the petitioners. The petitioners therein filed objections (Annexure P-8) which, on contest, tooth and nail by contesting respondents No. 1 and 2 were dismissed by the Executing Court vide order Annexure P-16, impugned herein, thereby directing the petitioners to vacate demised shop within a week, leaving the matter open regarding withdrawal of money lying deposited with the Court to be decided after framing of issues and recording evidence of the parties.