Rahul Arora v. Ashok Chadha

order.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE MAY 25, 2022/dk/sk

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 25th May, 2022 + RSA 238/2019 & CM APPLs. 20693-94/2022, REVIEW PET. 120/2022 RAHUL ARORA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Manoj K. Srivastava, Advocate. (M:9810807673) versus ASHOK CHADHA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Chadha, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL.20694/2022 2. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the review petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 68 days in filing the review petition is condoned. 3. CM APPL.20694/2022 is disposed of. REVIEW PET.120/2022 & CM APPL.20693/2022 in RSA 238/2019 4. The present review petition has been filed by the Appellant/Defendant/Tenant (hereinafter "Defendant") seeking review of the order dated 11th January, 2022 passed by this Court vide which the second appeal preferred by the Defendant was disposed of. Vide the said order, the Defendant was directed to pay the entire use and occupation charges to the Respondent/Plaintiff/Landlord (hereinafter "Plaintiff") on or before 31st March, 2022. Subject to payment of the aforesaid amount, the Defendant was allowed to retain the possession of the property in question till 15th April, 2022. 5. The background of the case is that the Defendant was a tenant in the shop bearing No.7/73, Bhim Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi- 110032 measuring 60 sq. yards (hereinafter "suit property"). The Trial Court vide judgment / decree dated 12th April, 2018 in CS No. 9270/2016 titled Sh. Ashok Chadha v. Sh. Rahul Arora directed eviction of the Defendant from the suit property. The Appellate Court vide judgment dated 31st August, 2019 upheld the judgment of the Trial Court. 6. A second appeal was preferred to this Court against the judgment of the Appellate Court. Vide order dated 2nd December, 2019, the eviction of the Defendant was stayed subject to deposit of upto date mesne profits in the form of fixed deposit with the Executing Court. Thereafter, it came to the attention of the Court that the Defendant had deposited mesne profits only up-until 2nd December, 2019. The Court vide order dated 17th February, 2021 directed the Defendant to deposit the mesne profits up till 17th February, 2021. The Defendant sought modification of the said order and on 15th April, 2021 the Defendant was directed to deposit the aforesaid amount in two instalments- (i) 50% of the amount on or before 15th May, 2021; and (ii) the balance amount on or before 31st May, 2021. None of these orders were complied with. 7. On 11th January, 2022, detailed submissions were heard on each of the issues which were raised by the Defendant. The said issues, inter alia, related to- a. That the ownership/title documentation in favour of the Plaintiff is not proper. b. That the suit is barred by limitation. c. That the plea of adverse possession was not considered by the courts below. d. That the landlord/tenant relationship is not established. 8. Ld. counsels for both the parties had made their submissions on the said date and the Court gave detailed findings on all the issues that were raised and discussed the applicable case laws/judgments. 9. The said order of this Court dated 11th January, 2022 was assailed by the Defendant before the Supreme Court vide SLP (Civil) No.5664/2022. However, the said SLP was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 4th April, 2022 in the following terms: "Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the record, we do not find any reason to entertain this petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The petition seeking special leave to appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of." 10. It is after the dismissal of the SLP assailing the order dated 11th January, 2022, the present review petition has been filed by the Defendant before this Court. 11. Mr. Manoj Srivastava, ld. Coun