Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 637 (UTT)

MANIK BABAR v. DILIP KUMAR MEHROTRA

CLR/52/2023 · 2026-01-03

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:99 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CLR/52/2023 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Siddharath Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist. 2. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionist / defendant against the judgment and decree dated 14.03.2023 passed by Addl. District Judge, Haldwani, Nainital in SCC Case No. 08 of 2020 (Dilip Kumar Mehrotra Vs. Manik Babar). 4. On the previous date, learned counsel for the revisionist was directed to get instruction from his client within how much time, he will vacate the shop in question. 5. Today, Mr. Manik Babar, revisionist is present in person before this Court and request that reasonable time of two years may be given to him to vacate the shop in question and rent be also enhanced from Rs. 4,000/- per month to Rs. 6,000/- per month with effect from January, 2026. 6. Mr. Piyush Garg, who appears for the landlord – respondent, raised objection to it, and submits that one year and six month time is sufficient to the revisionist to vacate the shop in question but subsequently taking into consideration that revisionist has three daughters and one is of marriageable age, he accepted the proposal of the revisionists. 7. In such view of the matter, present revision is disposed of in terms of statement as given with the direction with the direction that the revisionist shall vacate the shop, in question on or before 31.12.2027 positively and shall pay monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month to the respondent regularly in first week of each month without any break. It is further directed that revisionist shall give undertaking to this effect within 15 days before the concerned Court and if the revisionist fails to vacate the shop in question on or before 2026:UHC:99 31.12.2027, then the Executing Court shall forthwith proceed to execute the decree against the revisionist. It is also made clear that revisionist shall not sublet the shop in question to any third person during this period. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 03.01.2026 SKS