IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3494 OF 2010
(Arising out of SLP(C) No.23135/2007)
SANJAY KUMAR VAISH AND ORS. Appellant(s)
:VERSUS:
RAJENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL AND ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties.
After having gone through the impugned order passed by
the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad in Writ Petition No.91/RC/1995, we are of the
considered opinion that the said impugned order cannot be
sustained in law. The learned Single Judge committed an error
in its finding that notice was not properly served on the
tenants – respondents herein. More so when the postman was
examined who had categorically stated that notice was tendered
to the tenants but they refused. Refusal would make it to be
proper and deemed service.
-2-
We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the
impugned order has to be set aside and we do so.
However, the learned counsel for the respondents prayed
for time to vacate the premises on the ground that there is
dearth of accommodation in the City of Lucknow and the
respondents are carrying on their business since long.
Upon the respondents’ filing usual undertaking in this
Court within four weeks from today and subject to payment of
all the arrears of rent together with monthly rent regularly,
we direct that the respondents shall hand over peaceful and
vacant possession of the premises to the appellant on or
before 31st December, 2010. If they fail to do so, the
appellant would be at liberty to execute the decree of
eviction forthwith.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
…………………J
(DEEPAK VERMA)
…………………J
(K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN)
New Delhi;
April 19, 2010.