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.