CW/9556/2026 of BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Vs NARESH ARORA S/O BIHARI LAL ARORA on 18 August 2026

Order

18/08/2026

1. Writ petition comes up on misc. application (1/2026) filed by and on behalf of respondents under Article 226 (3) of the Constitution of India, seeking to vacate the ex parte interim stay order dated 30.06.2026.

2. Reply to the application for vacation of stay order has not been filed by petitioner i.e. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation").

3. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of respective parties and perused the record.

(2 of 7) [CW-9556/2026]

4. The order dated 30.06.2026 passed by this Court in the present writ petition, reads as under:- "1. A final order of eviction against petitioner has been passed by the rent tribunal on the ground that the term of tenancy as per registered lease deed dated 09.06.2004, had expired and appeal thereagainst has also been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that if some reasonable time is granted to petitioner to shift and re-locate the petrol pump at another place, petitioner shall not press the writ petition on merits.

4. He further submits that no arrears of rent/profit is due and petitioner is regularly paying the mesne profit and same is also been accepted by the respondents.

5. In view of the limited prayer of counsel for petitioner, let notice of writ petition be issued to respondent along with copy of this order.

6. In the meanwhile, petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the rented premises in execution of the impugned eviction certificate dated 21.03.2024, subject to payment of arrears of rent/ mesne profits as ordered by the Rent Tribunal and continuing to pay the same. "

5. Learned counsel for respondents submits that a lease agreement dated 09.06.2004 was entered into in favour of petitioner to establish one retail outlet by petitioner on the leased land of respondents. The lease agreement was executed for a period of 19 years and 11 months, which has expired on 31.08.2022 and since thereafter, no rent has been received by the respondents. Simultaneously, it has been pointed out that a separate agreement in the nature of "Dispensing Pump and Selling License" (for short "DPSL") was also entered into between the petitioner- Corporation and respondents and under this agreement, respondents in the capacity of dealer of petitioner-Corporation, were permitted to operate the retail outlet to sell the motor spirit

(3 of 7) [CW-9556/2026] supplied by petitioner-Corporation. It has been pointed out that term of DPSL agreement expired on 05.11.2022, however, same has been renewed and a fresh DPSL agreement dated 05.11.2022 has been executed for a terms of five years, which is valid up to 04.11.2027, but petitioner-Corporation has arbitrarily and illegally stopped supply of motor spirit to the respondents, despite of the fact that DPSL agreement is alive and in force between the parties.

6. Learned counsel for respondents further submits that after expiry of term of lease agreement, respondents filed petition before the Rent Tribunal under Section 18 of the Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act of 2001"), claiming possession and mesne profits. This petition was allowed vide final order dated 21.03.2024 and petitioner-Corporation was directed to handover the possession of leased land within six months so also to pay mesne profits at the rate of Rs.1,03,680/- per month w.e.f. date of filing of the petition till handing over the possession and in case, possession is not handed over within six months, then to pay mesne profits three times as per Section 20 (3) of the Act of 2001. Learned counsel further submits that the final order dated 21.03.2024 was challenged by petitioner-Corporation by filing statutory appeal but its appeal has been dismissed vide judgment dated 02.02.2026 by the Rent Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan-I.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that no amount of mesne profits, as directed by the Rent Tribunal vide final order dated 21.03.2024, was paid by petitioner-Corporation to respondents, however, in the Clause (G) of the writ petition, a

(4 of 7) [CW-9556/2026] false averment was made that petitioner has been regularly paying the rent and no arrears of rent have ever accrued against petitioner. Similarly, counsel for respondents submits that the stay order dated 30.06.2026 was also obtained by petitioner- Corporation, by making a false statement before the Court that no arrears of rent/mesne profit is due and petitioner is regularly paying the mesne profits and same has also been accepted by the respondents.

8. Learned counsel for respondents further pointed out that mis-statements, made by and on behalf of petitioner-Corporation before this Court in respect of making payment of mesne profits regularly and having no arrears due against respondents, finds corroboration, because soon after passing the order dated 30.06.2026 by this Court in favour of petitioner-Corporation, a letter dated 13.07.2026 (Annexure-1 enclosed with the application), was written by petitioner-Corporation mentioning therein that since respondents had closed the bank account, and details of any other alternative bank account has not been provided, hence, arrears of rent/mesne profits could not be paid, however, a request was made to the respondents to furnish their bank account details at the earliest so that petitioner-Corporation may remit the arrears of rent/mesne profits.

9. The submission of counsel for respondents is that it is apparent from the record that petitioner-Corporation did not approach before this High Court with disclosure of correct and true facts, rather obtained the ex parte stay order in its favour from this Court on 30.06.2026 by making a false and misleading statements. His submission is that thereafter, in the guise of stay

(5 of 7) [CW-9556/2026] order dated 30.06.2026, Corporation has stopped supply to motor spirit despite of the fact that DPSL agreement is alive and in force and further for seeking an interim relief, application under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, has been filed before the Commercial Court and no effective order is being passed therein due to operation of stay order dated 30.06.2026 in the present writ petition. Hence, the stay order dated 30.06.2026 be vacated and the writ petition itself be dismissed at this stage, with exemplary cost. It is noteworthy that respondents in the application itself has disclosed that an Execution Petition No.150/2025 was filed by them wherein an order of attachment dated 15.03.2025 was passed by the Rent Tribunal and thereafter the vacant possession of the leased property has been handed over from the petitioner to the respondents and at present, leased property is in lawful and physical possession of the respondents, although, the arrears of mesne profits as directed by the Rent Tribunal in the final order dated 21.03.2024, are still falling due against petitioner- Corporation.

10. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, assisted by Mr. Shashank Agarwal, submits that petitioner- Corporation has always been ready to pay the due amount of mesne profits and a Bank Draft of Rs.47,55,791/- has been got prepared in the name of respondents and they are ready to handover the Bank Draft to the counsel for respondents. Further submission on behalf of petitioner-Corporation is that indeed petitioner-Corporation has always been ready and willing to pay the rent/mesne profits, but on account of closure of bank account

(6 of 7) [CW-9556/2026] by the respondents, same could not be paid, however, now entire arrears of mesne profits are being paid to respondents through Bank Draft and if respondents still claim to have any amount of mesne profit outstanding against petitioner, the issue may be left open to be considered by the Executing Court in the pending execution.

11. Further, counsel for petitioner-Corporation, having instructions from the authorized Officer, who is present in person on behalf of petitioner-Corporation, submits that since the possession of leased property has already been handed over to the respondents and petitioner-Company is agreeable to pay the outstanding arrears of mesne profits through Bank Draft, hence, in that view, petitioner-Company does not want to continue the present writ petition and seeks permission to withdraw the same and since by allowing such permission, the stay order dated 30.06.2026 automatically will come to an end, therefore, in that eventuality, it is no more required to consider the contentions on merits, made by and on behalf of respondents to vacate the stay order.

12. Heard and Considered.

13. Prima facie, based on the letter dated 13.07.2026 of BPCL and by offering to pay the amount of mesne profits by way of Bank Draft today, it is apparent that due arrears of rent/mesne profits have not been paid and on this ground alone, ex parte stay order dated 30.06.2026 is liable to be vacated, however, since the petitioner-Corporation does not want to pursue the writ petition on merits, then it is not required to enter into merits of the other contentions made by counsel for respondents, but such

(7 of 7) [CW-9556/2026] contentions of respondents shall remain open to be raised and considered before any appropriate forum of law, if so required, hence, with such observations, without entering into merits/demerits of the submissions made by and on behalf of both sides, this Court finds that it would be just and proper to permit the withdrawal of the writ petition, as with the withdrawal of main writ petition, interim order dated 30.06.2026 automatically will come to an end. Thus, the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn and is hereby dismissed as withdrawn.

14. As a consequence, the ex parte interim stay order dated 30.06.2026 stands vacated.

15. Since the Execution Petition is pending before the Rent Tribunal, the Bank Draft of due arrears of mesne profit of Rs.47,55,791/- may be deposited by the petitioner-Corporation before the Executing Court.

16. Stay application, application for vacation of stay order and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

17. No costs. (SUDESH BANSAL),J 34/NITIN