Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr.Sanjay Aggarwal, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.P.S.Khandelwal with Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Advocate for the Respondent. + CM No.13418/2006 in RCSA No.20/2005 * This is an application filed jointly by the parties in terms whereof the appellant does not want to prosecute the appeal and CM No. 11497/2005 and has already handed over the tenanted premises to the respondent no.l. In terms of the averments made in the application, it is also agreed that the amount deposited by the appellant towards damages in this court as well as towards rent before the Additional Rent Controller under Section 27 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 be released in favour of the appellant. , The appellant to also withdraw special leave petition filed before the apex court. In view of the averments made in the application, the application is allowed. + RCSA No.20/2005 & CM No.11497/2005 In view of the prayer made in CM No.13418/2006, the appeal and CM No.11497/2005 are dismissed as withdrawn. The amount deposited by the appellant before this court and before the Additional Rent Controller be released in favour of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signing Date:08.02.2024 10:07 Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. appellant on production of a certified copy of the order of the :.D.-I (a) Continuation Sheet >r. No. Date Orders M Supreme Court dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner/appellant. - October 03, 2006 SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.