Full Text
Translation output
JUDGMENT
17.: * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 249/2010 & CM 19392/2010 MEENA DEVI Petitioner Through Mr. Gaganpreet Singh, Adv.
VERSUS
SHYAM SUNDER Respondent Through Mr. P.K. Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS.
JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL ORDER % 08.12.2010 RC.REV. 249/2010 & CM 19392/2010 The petitioner is present in person with her counsel. After some arguments, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not pressing the petition on merits and prays that petitioner may be given some time to vacate the premises in question. The respondent is present in person with counsel. Counsel for the respondent submits that he was the counsel for the respondent/land lord in the trial court and he shall be filing his vakalatnama today in the Registry. Under the instructions from the respondent, the counsel for the respondent states that the respondent has no objection in granting time to the petitioner up to 30.08.2011 to vacate the premises in question and the respondent will not execute the eviction order till then. 2010:DHC:13051 In view of above statement given by the counsel for parties the present petition and pending application stand disposed of as not pressed. The petitioner is granted time till 30.08.2011 to vacate the premises in question subject to filing of usual undertaking by the petitioner within two weeks with a copy to the respondent. Renotify on 13.01.2011. In the meanwhile, the respondent shall not execute the eviction order till the next date of hearing. The parties to appear in person on the next date.
VEENA BIRBAL.J DECEMBER 08, 2010 srb I ^ (?l gse 0rJeY_ f J. i'°