SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Prateek Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner-judgment debtor and Sri S.K. Pal, learned counsel for the respondents-decree holder.
(2.) This petition has been filed praying for the following relief; "1- Issue a direction or order to quash the impugned order dated 14.7.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), I, Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 33/23/2016 (Mohan Lal v. Hulaas Chand ). 2- Issue a direction or order to quash the impugned order dated 18.7.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), I, Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 33/23/2016 (Mohan Lal v. Hulaas Chand ). 3- Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4- Award cost of this petition in favour of the petitioner."
(3.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondents-landlord/decree holder filed a Rent Case No. 35 of 2010, under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the portion under tenancy of the petitioner-judgment debtor as briefly described in the first paragraph of the order dated 29.2.2016 in Rent Case No. 35 of 2010 passed by the Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar. By the aforesaid order, the release application was allowed and the petitioner-judgment debtor was directed to vacate the premises and handover peaceful possession to the respondents-landlord/decree holder within two months. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner challenged the aforesaid order dated 29.2.2016 in Rent Appeal No. 36 of 2016 which was dismissed by the court of Additional District Judge, Court No. 7, Kanpur Nagar. Against the order dated 29.2.2016 passed in Rent Case No. 35 of 2010 and the judgment dated 4.3.2017 passed in Rent Appeal No. 36 of 2016, the petitioner filed Writ A No. 18149 of 2017 (Hulas Chandra Mundhra v. Mohan Lal Kayan and 3 others ), which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 27.4.2017 observing as under; "At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for some time to vacate the premises. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the interest of justice would be served if the petitioner is allowed time up to 30th November, 2017 to vacate the premises. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by affirming the judgment and orders passed by the courts below subject to the observation that for a period up to 30th November, 2017, the petitioner shall be evicted from the premises in dispute pursuant to the release order provided the petitioner by 30th May, 2017 furnishes an undertaking along with an affidavit in the Court of Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar that he will handover vacant and peaceful possession of the premises in question to the landlord-respondent on 01st December, 2017. It is made clear that if by 30th May, 2017 the aforesaid undertaking is furnished in the Court of Prescribed Authority, Kanpur Nagar then the release order shall become executable forthwith. It is also made clear that if by 01st December, 2017 the petitioner fails to handover vacant and peaceful possession of the premises in question to the landlord-respondent despite undertaking, it would only be open to the landlord-respondent to execute the release order but he may also initiate proceeding against the petitioner for contempt of Court.";