SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 1436

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. V. SACHDEVA
Vs.
Y. M. Sehgal
Decided on December 06,1999

The court has the discretion to grant time to vacate premises and impose conditions even when dismissing a special leave petition.

Headnote:

Interference - Grant of Time to Vacate Premises - Special Leave Petition Dismissed

Fact of the Case:

The court dismissed the special leave petition as it was not a fit case for interference. However, the court granted time to the petitioner to vacate the premises and ordered the petitioner to pay monthly rent to the respondent until vacating the premises.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the special leave petition did not warrant interference, but granted time to vacate the premises and imposed conditions on the petitioner.

Issues: The main issue was the grant of time to vacate the premises and the monthly rent payment by the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court decided not to interfere with the special leave petition but granted time to vacate the premises and imposed conditions on the petitioner, including monthly rent payment and a restriction on the respondent from letting out or disposing of the premises for a certain period.

Final Decision: The special leave petition was dismissed, but time was granted to the petitioner to vacate the premises with specified conditions.

( 1 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties we do not think this is a fit case for our interference and hence this special leave petition is dismissed. However as the question of grant of time to vacate the suit premises is left to us by counsel of both the sides we deem it fit to grant time to the petitioner to vacate the premises in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case upto 31. 01. 2001 on the petitioner filing the usual undertaking in this court within four weeks from today. In the meantime from 1/12/1999 till the petitioner vacates the premises the petitioner will pay to the respondent - landlord monthly rent of rs. 2,000. 00.

( 2 ) IF any terms of the undertaking is breached or the monthly payment as aforesaid is not made or if the undertaking is not filed within the aforesaid period then the extension of time to vacate the suit premises shall stand withdrawn automatically. It is also directed that within the period of three years from the date of obtaining possession the respondent will not let out the premises to anyone else nor shall he dispose of the premises. If he does so he shall give first preference to the petitioner to purchase the premises at the then prevailing market price.

( 3 ) IT is obvious that as the special leave petition is being rejected as aforesaid, and only time to vacate is granted by consent, all findings reached on facts by the courts below will remain confirmed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top