Full Text
Translation output
A-10
% 22.09.2011
Present: Mr.Rajat Aneja and Ms. Neha Rastogi, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Richa S.
Bhatnagar, Advocate for the respondent.
+CONT. CAS (C) No. 526/2010
*
The parties are closely related; the plaintiff in the suit proceedings was admittedly in occupation of the first and second floors; the defendant was in occupation of the ground floor. The dispute now raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is not getting an access to the water and electricity meters which are installed on the rare portion of the ground floor which is in the occupation of the defendant and he has violated the terms and conditions of the undertaking given by him on 23.10.2009. This factum is disputed by learned counsel for the respondent.
After some discussion, it has been agreed that the defendant will allow the plaintiff to have access to the water and electricity meters as and when desired by him on his giving an SMS to the non-applicant who shall honour the undertaking in terms of the order dated 23.10.2009. Both the parties are satisfied with this arrangement and the Court hopes and expects that this shall be honoured in continuity.
It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the non- applicant that a separate suit for declaration and injunction has
2011:DHC:9621 also been filed by the petitioner; the prayer in that suit is that the common area in the suit premises be made accessible to the petitioner and he should be declared as owner of that area.
Be that as it may, in view of the aforenoted settlement arrived at between the parties, nothing survives in this petition which is disposed of accordingly.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 a
& y M i(.
2011:DHC:9621
% 22.09.2011
Present: Mr.Rajat Aneja and Ms. Neha Rastogi, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Richa S.
Bhatnagar, Advocate for the respondent.
+CONT. CAS (C) No. 526/2010
*
The parties are closely related; the plaintiff in the suit proceedings was admittedly in occupation of the first and second floors; the defendant was in occupation of the ground floor. The dispute now raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is not getting an access to the water and electricity meters which are installed on the rare portion of the ground floor which is in the occupation of the defendant and he has violated the terms and conditions of the undertaking given by him on 23.10.2009. This factum is disputed by learned counsel for the respondent.
After some discussion, it has been agreed that the defendant will allow the plaintiff to have access to the water and electricity meters as and when desired by him on his giving an SMS to the non-applicant who shall honour the undertaking in terms of the order dated 23.10.2009. Both the parties are satisfied with this arrangement and the Court hopes and expects that this shall be honoured in continuity.
It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the non- applicant that a separate suit for declaration and injunction has
2011:DHC:9621 also been filed by the petitioner; the prayer in that suit is that the common area in the suit premises be made accessible to the petitioner and he should be declared as owner of that area.
Be that as it may, in view of the aforenoted settlement arrived at between the parties, nothing survives in this petition which is disposed of accordingly.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 a
& y M i(.
2011:DHC:9621
JUDGMENT