Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(UK) 160

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
VIVEK BHARTI SHARMA, J.
Manu Rishi Garg - Petitioner
Versus
V.K. Vashisht & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1758 of 2024
Decided On : 02-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Nikhil Singhal.
For the Respondent:Mr. S.K. Jain, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Amar Murti Shukla and Mr. Siddhartha Jain.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court upheld the validity of a compromise agreement between a tenant and landlord, establishing enforceable terms for possession and occupation charges, highlighting the significance of mutual consent in tenancy disputes.

Headnote:
Writ Petition - Tenant-Landlord Dispute - The court addressed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash previous judgments favoring the landlord. The court noted a compromise between the parties, establishing terms for the tenant to vacate the premises, pay occupation charges, and refrain from alterations, which influenced the court's decision to dispose of the petition with specific directives.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition to challenge the judgments allowing the landlord's release application and dismissing the tenant's appeal. Both parties reached a compromise regarding the tenant's vacating the premises and payment terms.
Finding of the Court:
The court accepted the compromise and provided directions for the tenant to vacate the premises by July 1, 2026, pay monthly charges, and not alter the premises, ensuring compliance with the agreed terms.
Issues: Whether the tenant could challenge the previous judgments and what terms should govern the tenant's continued occupation of the premises.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the compromise reached by the parties, which provided a clear framework for the tenant's obligations and the landlord's rights, reinforcing the enforceability of such agreements in tenancy disputes.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of in accordance with the terms of the compromise, with specific directives for the tenant's obligations and the landlord's rights.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

By means of present writ petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, petitioner seeks to quash the judgment/order 26.07.2022 passed by Prescribed Authority/Second Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dehradun in PA Case No.22 of 2015 “Sri V.K. Vashisht and Ors. vs. Smt. Leelawati and Ors.” as well as the judgment/order dated 30.04.2023 passed by 8th Additional District Judge, Dehradun in RCA No.19 of 2022, whereby the release application filed by the respondents/landlords has been allowed and the appeal filed there against by the petitioner/tenant has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for both the parties would submit that this writ petition may be disposed of at the admission stage today itself as the parties have arrived at a compromise on the following conditions:-

(i) That, the petitioner/tenant shall vacate and handover actual physical possession of the shop in question to the respondent/landlord within two years from today.

(ii) That the petitioner/tenant shall pay a sum of Rs.2000/- per month to the respondents/landlord as use and occupation charges by 7th of every month.

(iii) That the rent already deposited by the petitioner/tenant shall be withdrawn by the respondent/landlord without any objection by the petitioner/tenant.

(iv) That the petitioner/tenant shall not sublet and shall not cause any structural alteration in the shop in question during these two years.

(v) That the petitioner/tenant shall file an undertaking before the Prescribed Authority within two weeks from today to the aforesaid effect.

3. In view of the concession given by both the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The petitioner/tenant shall vacate and handover actual possession of the tenanted premises i.e. the shop as described in the plaint to the respondents/landlord by 1st July, 2026.

(ii) The petitioner/tenant shall pay a sum of @ Rs.2,000/- per month to the respondent/landlord towards use and occupation charges by the 7th of each month.

(iii) The petitioner shall not create third party interest and shall not cause any structural alteration in the tenanted premises.

(iv) The rent already deposited by the petitioner/tenant shall be withdrawn by the respondent/landlord without any objection by the petitioner/tenant.

(v) The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking before the Prescribed Authority within 15 days from today in respect of conditions mentioned in sub para (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of para 3 of this order.

(vi) In the event of default of any of the aforesaid conditions, the petitioner shall not be entitled to continue in the premises in question up to 01.07.2026 and the respondent/landlord would be at liberty to execute the decree forthwith.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document