IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1894 of 2008 Munir Ahmad …Petitioner Versus Naushad Ahmad & others …Respondents Sri Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for petitioner Sri J.P. Joshi, Advocate for respondents Dated: October 21, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. Heard Sri Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.P. Joshi, learned counsel for respondents and perused the record. The material available on record shows that both the courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact against the petitioner. I do not find any ground for interfering in the impugned judgment and orders passed by both the courts below. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, petition is dismissed in limine. Learned counsel for petitioner-tenant undertakes that he may be granted some reasonable time to vacate the premises in question. 2 As the premises in question is a commercial shop, it would therefore be reasonable to grant twelve months’ time to the petitioner-tenant for vacating the shop in question. The petitioner shall file an undertaking to the aforesaid effect for vacating premises in question immediately after expiry of twelve months, before the prescribed authority within a period of fifteen days. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP