SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.K. MAHESHWARI AND K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Rajiv Puri – Appellant
Versus
Amit Sharma And Others – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 7270, 7271 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 24789-24790 of 2023)
Decided on : 09-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties entered into a settlement regarding tenancy. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's acceptance and enforcement of the settlement. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. final order disposing of the appeals. (Para 9) |
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. Challenging the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the High Court of Delhi in CM Appl. No. 46165 of 2022 in R.C.(Rev.) No.123 of 2022 filed by the respondents (landlord) seeking fixation of user and occupation charges of the demised premises bearing No. G-18-A, South Extension Market, Part-I, New Delhi, and order dated 20.10.2023 dismissing CM Appl. No. 55351 of 2023 in R.C.(Rev.) No.123 of 2022 filed by the appellant (tenant) for modification of order dated 11.10.2023, the present appeals have been preferred.
3. During the pendency, several directions were issued with respect to the deposit of interim occupational charges as fixed by this Court. Later, on good sense having prevailed, the parties have entered into an amicable settlement on 23.04.2025 by way of a settlement deed to resolve the dispute in its entirety. As per the settlement deed, appellant has agreed to vacate the demised premises and handover the peaceful possession to respondents and withdraw/ request to dispose of any pending litigation. Likewise, respondents have agreed to not claim any arrears of rent, mesne profits and user charges from appellant. A relevant portion of the settlement deed dated 23.04.2025 has been reproduced for convenience :-
2. That, now the Second Party as a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month has voluntarily agreed to vacate the Said Shop i.e Shop on Ground Floor of property bearing no. G -18-A, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi as shown in red colour in the site plan filed by the First Party in the eviction petition bearing no.6255/2016 and shall hand over vacant, peaceful, and physical possession of the same to the First Party, along with the keys at the time of recording the statement before the Hon'ble Supreme court.
3. That in view of the settlement, it has been mutually agreed between the First Party and Second Party, that in furtherance of the possession of the said Shop being handed over by the Second Party to the First Party, the First Party shall not claim any arrears of rent/user occupation charges etc. whatsoever, including past, present, or future, with respect to the Said Shop from the Second Party subject to handover of the possession of the said Shop.
4. That the First Party, as a gesture of goodwill and without prejudice, agrees not to claim any arrears of rent, mesne profits, or user occupation charges against the Second Party in any court, including the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court, except for what has already been deposited by the Second Party before the respective forums and further endorses that the second party has no objection if the amount already deposited with the Hon'ble Supreme Court is released in favour of First Party.
5. That the Second Party undertakes to file appropriate applications for withdrawal of R.C. Rev. No. 123/2022 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and in SLP(C) Nos. 24789-24790/2023 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India or request the Hon'ble Supreme Court to exercise its power under Article 142 of Constitution of India to dispose of the
The tenant must compensate the landlords for the loss occasioned by the stay granted by the Court on the execution of the eviction order, and the best indicator for fixing the compensation payable by....
The court emphasized the necessity of fixing user and occupation charges that reflect fair market rent as a reasonable compensation for landlords during the pendency of eviction appeals.
The court emphasized the importance of the petitioner's undertaking to vacate the premises and the conditions for staying the execution of the eviction order.
The tenant must compensate the landlord for the loss suffered due to the delay in execution of the eviction order, and the use and occupation charges need not be the same as the contractual rate of r....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.