CSA 343/08 Jaipal Vs. Jai Narayan (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur J U D G M E N T In S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.343/2008 Jaipal Agarwal Vs. Jai Narayan Date of Judgment :: 24th August, 2009 P R E S E N T Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. R.K. Mathur, for appellant. Mr. G.D. Parwal, for respondent. ....... By the Court :- This is defendant's second appeal against the concurrent judgment and decree of eviction. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant does not press this appeal on merits and only seeks reasonable time for handing over the vacant possession of the suit premises to the respondent-landlord. 3. During the course of arguments, counsel for the respondent-landlord has agreed for granting time to the appellant-defendant upto 31/3/2011. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made at the bar and keeping in view that appellant has not pressed this appeal on merits and only sought time to vacate the suit premises, therefore, with consent of learned counsel for the parties this appeal along with the stay application is dismissed CSA 343/08 Jaipal Vs. Jai Narayan (2) with the order as follows :- (i) The appellant shall hand over the vacant possession of the suit premises to the respondent-landlord on or before 31/3/2011; (ii) The appellant shall continue to pay/deposit Rs.77/- per month to the respondent-plaintiff-landlord for the use and occupation of the suit premises by 15th of every month till vacant possession is handed over and shall further pay the arrears, if any, within one month and three defaults in making the payment of the monthly amount shall make the respondent-plaintiff- landlord entitle to get the suit premises vacated. (iii) The appellant shall not create any third party interest in the suit premises; (iv) The appellant shall submit an undertaking in writing containing the above terms and conditions in the trial court within a period of one month. 5. In case the appellant fails to comply with any of the above term and condition, the plaintiff-respondent- landlord would have a right to execute the decree. (J.R. Goyal),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D41