Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Petitioner Permitted to Continue Occupying Subject Property Until Auction: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment by the Delhi High Court, the Acting Chief Justice and Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora allowed a limited relief in a property auction case. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) orders and imposed specific conditions on the petitioner.

The case (W.P.(C) 42/2024) involved the petitioner, Rahul Anil Ahuja, seeking the quashing of an order dated 03.10.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT)-I in O.A. No. 889/2017 and recovery proceedings pending before the Recovery Officer in RC No. 294/2019. Additionally, the petitioner sought permission to participate in an auction scheduled for 22.03.2024 and to continue occupying the subject property until then.

The judgment highlighted the petitioner's liability to pay rent and arrears of rent, specifically referring to an order dated 25.10.2022 passed by DRT-II in SA No. 29/2018. It stressed the importance of complying with DRT orders and respecting the legal obligations arising from them.

"The Petitioner admits his liability to pay rent at Rs. 2 lakhs per month in accordance with the order dated 25.10.2022 passed by DRT-II in S.A. No. 294/2019. The Petitioner has thus, become liable to pay rent with effect from 25.10.2022."

"The Petitioner will be entitled to continue to occupy the subject property beyond 22.03.2024 only if he is declared as the successful bidder in the auction proceedings. In this scenario, the Petitioner will continue to remain liable to pay rent to Respondent No. 3 until he deposits the entire bid amount."

The judgment allowed the petitioner to continue occupying the subject property until 22.03.2024, subject to strict compliance with the imposed conditions. It stressed the importance of adhering to DRT orders and fulfilling the obligations related to rent payments. This decision provides clarity in a property dispute and underscores the significance of legal compliance in such matters.

Date of Decision: January 03, 2024

RAHUL ANIL AHUJA VS GURCHARAN DHA WAN & ORS.

 

Latest Legal News