* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 30/2009 & CM No.6747/2009 SATNAM SINGH Petitioner Through; Mr. Gaurav Gandhi, Advocate with Petitioner in person. versus HARI KISHAN GANDHI Respondent Through: Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, Advocate With respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN ORDER % 25.05.2009 At request of learned counselfor petitioner, he has been allowed to carry out some typographical corrections in the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner. On 12^ May, 2009, I had expressed my opinion that the ^ impugnedevictionorderwas in accordancewith law and calledfor no interference. However, as I was inclined to give some reasonable time to the petitioner to vacate the tenanted premises, both the parties agreed in Court that petitioner would vacate the tenanted premises on or before 30^ June, 2010. In fact, on 19^ May, 2009, petitioner has filed an affidavit of undertaking wherein he has undertaken to hand over to respondent Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:25.07.2024 16:19 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified % 'i V- L 3 physical and vacant possession of the tenanted premises bearing No.RU-85, Vishakha Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi-110034 on or before 30*^^ June, 2010. He has further undertaken in the affidavit that he shall neither sublet nor part with possession or create any third party interest in the tenanted premises in question. Petitioner has further undertaken to pay the admitted amount of rent, electricity and water charges upto the date till he hands over vacant and peaceful possession of the tenanted premises. Petitioner also undertakes to this Court that he would not seek any further extension of time to vacate the tenanted premises under any circumstances whatsoever. Respondent on his part undertakes and assures this Court that he would not execute the impugned judgment till 30'^'" June, 2010 and would not cause any hindrance or nuisance in petitioner's usage of tenanted premises. The aforesaid undertakings and statements made before this Court are accepted and shall form part of this order and the parties are held bound by the undertakings and the statements made by their counsel. It is made clear that in case, petitioner does not vacate the tenanted premises within the time mentioned in the affidavit of undertaking, respondent would be at liberty to initiate contempt proceedings in accordance with law including obtaining of police aid for evicting the petitioner. With the aforesaid orders, present petition and pending apphcation are disposed of. MAY 25, 2009 js RC.REV. 30/2009 MANMt>HA5:;j