Back
(2008) 10 SUPREME COURT CASES 186
(BEFORE B.N.AGRAWAL, H.S. BEDI AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.)
SAKHARAM GANESH AARAVANDEKAR AND ANOTHER — Petitioners
Versus
MAHADEO VINAYAK MATHKAR AND OTHERS — Respondents.
SLP (C) No. 21361 of 2008
Decided on : August 28, 2008
Dismissal - Special Leave Petition - Premises - Summary: The court dismissed the special leave petition and granted the petitioners time to vacate the premises, with directions for execution of possession if the petitioners fail to vacate within the specified time.
Fact of the Case:
The court heard the petitioners and found no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The petitioners were granted time to vacate the premises and were directed to file an undertaking to this effect. The respondents were given the option to move the court for recall if aggrieved by the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no ground to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the special leave petition. The petitioners were granted time to vacate the premises, and directions were given for execution of possession if the petitioners fail to vacate within the specified time.
Issues: The main issue was the dismissal of the special leave petition and the grant of time to vacate the premises, along with the directions for execution of possession if necessary.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of grounds to interfere with the impugned order and the grant of time to vacate the premises. The directions for execution of possession were provided to ensure compliance with the court's order.
Final Decision: The special leave petition was dismissed, and the petitioners were granted time to vacate the premises, with directions for execution of possession if necessary.
ORDER
1. Taken on board. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
2. The petitioners are, however, granted time till 30-11-2008 to vacate the premises in question upon filing undertaking to this effect in this Court within four weeks from today.
3. It is needless to say that in case the respondents feel aggrieved by this order, it would be open to them to move this Court for its recall.
4. It is directed that in case the petitioners fail to vacate the premises in question within the aforesaid time, it would be open to the decree-holder to file an execution petition for delivery of possession and in case such a petition has been already filed, an application shall be filed therein to the effect that the petitioners have not vacated the premises in question within the time granted by this Court.
5. In either eventuality, the executing court is not required to issue any notice to the petitioners. The executing court will see that delivery of possession is effected within a period of fifteen days from the date of filing of the execution petition or the application aforementioned.
6. In case for delivery of possession any armed force is necessary, the same shall be deputed by the Superintendent of Police within forty-eight hours from the date requisition is received therefor.
7. It is also directed that in case anybody else, other than the petitioners, is found in possession, he shall also be dispossessed from the premises in question.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
