TMI Blog1992 (10) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... triction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), as amended by Act No. 2 of 1985. The proceedings relate to a residential house in Chandigarh which was let out to the petitioner by the respondent. The respondent was initially employed as Accounts Officer with the Finance Department of the Government of Haryana. In 1969, he went on deputation with the Haryana Agricultural University (hereinafter referred to as `the University'). His services were transferred to the University by the Government of Haryana with effect from November 1, 1975, and while he was employed on the post of Comptroller in the University he retired from service with effect from February 28, 1991. Claiming to be a `specified landlord' within the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mises provided he pays the entire arrears of rent within 15 days from today, and also files an undertaking with the Court of the Rent Controller to the effect that he shall hand over the vacant possession of the premises on the expiry of aforesaid period. On March 16, 1992, the petitioner moved a petition in the high Court under section 151 CPC seeking three months, time to vacate the house and for waiving the requirement of filing of an undertaking. The said petition was rejected by the High Court by order dated March 18, 1992. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an undertaking dated March 20, 1992 before the Rent Controller wherein the petitioner after referring to the direction contained in the order of the High Court dated March 6, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r vacant possession of the premises on the expiry of aforesaid period and his having- submitted a written undertaking in accordance with the said direction, the petitioner is precluded from assailing the judgment of the High Court by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. Shri Sehgal has urged that the fact that the petitioner has qualified his undertaking by using the words subject to his rights for filing SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order of eviction would not alter the position. In support of his aforesaid submission Shri Sehgal has placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in Thacker Hariram Motiram v. Balkrishan Chatbrabhu Thacker Ors., [1989] Supp. 2 SCC 655; Vidhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of one month on his (i) paying the entire arrears of rent within 15 days from the date of the judgment; and (ii) filing an undertaking with the court of Rent Controller to the effect that he shall hand over the vacant possession of the premises on the expiry of the period of one month. The petitioner made an effort to obtain extension of time for vacating the premises without furnishing the undertaking and he filed a petition for the purpose before the High Court. The said petition was, however, dismissed by the High Court. Having failed in his attempt to obtain extension of time for vacating the premises without furnishing an undertaking the petitioner had two options open to him, (i) to avail the protection from eviction from the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he could only be entitled on the footing that it is valid, and then turn round and say it is void for the purpose of securing some other advantage . [See: Verschures Creameries Ltd. v. Hull and Netherlands Steamship Co. Ltd., (1921) 2 R.B. 608, at p.612, Scrutton, L.J]. According to Halsbury's Laws of England, 4th Edn.,Vol. 16, after taking an advantage under an order (for example for the payment of costs) a party may be precluded from saying that it is invalid and asking to set it aside . (para 1508). In Thacker Hariram Motiram v. Balkrishan Chatbrabhu Thacker Ors.(supra), this Court was dealing with a similar situation. The High (Court, while deciding the second appeal in an eviction matter gave the appellant (tenant) one year& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the petitioner, having given an undertaking in pursuance to the directions given by the High Court in the Judgment dated March 6, 1992, and having availed the protection from eviction on the basis of the said undertaking, cannot be permitted to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution and assail the said judgment of the High Court. In that view of the matter, we do not consider it necessary to deal with the submissions urged by Dr. Singhvi that the respondent, being an employee of the University at the time of his retirement, was not a 'specified landlord' under section 2(hh) of the Act. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed but without any orders as to costs. Petition dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
