Laxmi Chaudhary vs Sahib Singh Chaudhary

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 3385 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s).769 OF 2019)

LAXMI CHAUDHARY Appellant(s)

VERSUS

SAHIB SINGH CHAUDHARY Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J.:

(1) Leave granted.

(2) This appeal arises out of an order dated 4 th December, 2018

passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in CM NO.50677

of 2018 in R.F.A. No.699 of 2018 in and by which the High Court

has vacated the stay granted in favour of the appellant-tenant

on the ground of non-compliance of the conditional order passed

by the High Court.

(3) The facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows. The

respondent-plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for eviction and

recovery of damages and mesne profit against the appellant-

defendant-tenant (in regard to the tenanted property comprising Signature Not Verified

basement and the second floor in J-1/72 in Gupta Colony, New Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2019.04.05 16:29:41 IST Reason:

Delhi). The Trial court by its judgment dated 21st December,

2017 decreed the suit in favour of the respondent-landlord and 2

ordered eviction. The Trial Court further awarded the damages

payable to the respondent-landlord at the rate of Rs.20,000/-

per month w.e.f. 17th January, 2008 till the delivery of the

possession of the property. The Trial Court also granted

permanent injunction in favour of the respondent-plaintiff.

(4) The appellant-defendant preferred appeal before the High

Court. By order dated 27th August, 2018, the High Court

admitted the appeal and granted stay of the order of the Trial

court subject to the appellant’s paying the damages for use and

occupation at the rate of Rs.7,500/- per month from 17 th

January, 2008 till 31st December, 2017 and thereafter at the

rate of Rs.15,000/- w.e.f. 1st January, 2018, payable by 30th

day of each calendar month. The High Court also directed that

in case of delay of payment, interest at the rate of 6% per

annum is payable by the appellant to the respondent. The

appellant could not comply with the condition as ordered by the

High Court and, therefore, by the impugned Order dated 4 th

December, 2018, the High Court has vacated the stay granted in

favour of the appellant-defendant. Being aggrieved, the

appellant-defendant has preferred this appeal.

(5) By Order dated 18th January, 2019, this Court has directed

the appellant to pay the arrears of Rs.10,80,000/- and also to

pay Rs.15,000/- from 1st January, 2018. By Order dated 8 th

February, 2019, the said order was modified directing the

appellant to deposit amount of Rs.15,000/- before the High 3

Court. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 18th

January, 2019, without prejudice to her contentions, the

appellant has deposited Rs.10,80,000/- before the High Court.

Likewise, the appellant-defendant has been depositing

Rs.15,000/- as damages for use and occupation of premises

viz., basement as well as the second floor and such deposit was

without prejudice to her contentions in the eviction suit.

(6) We have heard Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, learned counsel

appearing for the appellant-defendant-tenant and Mr. D.K.

Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff-

landlord and also perused the impugned judgment and the

materials on record.

(7) Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord submitted that

during the interregnum period the respondent-landlord has filed

the execution petition and had taken possession of the basement

on 5th January, 2019, wherein the appellant was running a beauty

parlour.

(8) Admittedly, now the appellant is in possession of the

residential premises, namely, the second floor. Considering

the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and

having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that

the appellant has deposited the amount of Rs.10,80,000/- and

also deposited Rs.15,000/- per month, the impugned order of the

High Court is set aside and the stay granted in favour of the

appellant-defendant qua the second floor shall stand restored. 4

(9) Since the amount of Rs.15,000/- was directed to be paid

for both the premises – basement as well as the second floor

and having regard to the fact that the respondent has now taken

the possession of the basement by filing the execution

petition, as an interim measure we direct the appellant-

defendant to pay Rs.6000/- for use and occupation of the second

floor until the disposal of the appeal pending before the High

Court.

(10) The respondent-landlord is permitted to withdraw

Rs.10,80,000/- and also the subsequent deposit of the amount at

the rate of Rs.15,000/-p.m. by filing the necessary affidavit

of undertaking before the High Court to the effect that the

withdrawal of money will be subject to the final outcome of the

appeal before the High Court. Without prejudice to her

contentions in the appeal, the appellant shall pay the amount

of Rs.6000/- as damages for use and occupation of the second

floor of the premises on or before of every 10 th day of each

calendar month through RTGS to the account of the respondent-

landlord.

(11) The appeal is allowed with the direction, as indicated

above. No costs.

.........................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

.........................J. (R. SUBHASH REDDY) NEW DELHI, APRIL 3, 2019.