SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No. 3571 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. I.P. Kohli, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The petitioner herein is the tenant of the shop owned by the respondent who initiate the proceeding of eviction of the petitioner under the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (J.D.), Mussoorie, dismissed the PA Case No. 02 of 2023 instituted by the respondent against which a Rent Control Appeal No. 03 of 2025 was preferred and the same was allowed. 4. Being aggrieved with the judgment passed in Rent Control Appeal the instant writ petition has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. On the previous date before the Coordinate Bench learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants time to vacate the suit property. Consequently, on the request of learned counsel for both the parties the matter is posted for today with the direction to both the parties to be remain present in court. 6. The petitioner, who is suffering from paralysis is present in court with his son. The respondent-landlord is also present. 7. Mr. I.P. Kohli, who appears for the respondent, submits that initially six months period was proposed by the respondent to vacate the shop in question but subsequently the period was extended to one year. 8. Now, taking into consideration that on the previous date learned counsel for the petitioner submits before the Coordinate Bench that the petitioner is ready to vacate the shop in question and the respondent, who is the owner of the shop in question, is also agreed to give reasonable time to the petitioner to vacate the shop, however, the petitioner, who is present in person, submits that he is running a garment shop since 1993 and he has a very goodwill in the area, therefore, the reasonable time may be given him to vacate the shop. 9. In such view of the matter, this court is of the view that two years time is reasonable period to the petitioner to vacate the shop in question. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the petitioner to vacate the shop in question on or before 31.03.2028 and the undertaking to this effect he shall file before the Prescribed Authority within 15 days from today. 10. In addition to this, the petitioner shall pay the agreed rent to the respondent without subletting the shop in question to anyone else. In default, the respondent is free to approach the Executing Court and, in such an eventuality, the Executing Court should not be liberal in enforcing the judgment and decree passed in the Rent Control Appeal. 11. No order as to costs. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 24.03.2026 PR