Landlord appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (John H. Stanley, J.), dated November 28, 2011, which, inter alia, denied its motion for summary judgment on the petition in a holdover summary proceeding and for Rule 130 sanctions and granted the cross motion of respondents tenant and undertenant for summary judgment dismissing the petition.

Per Curiam.

Order (John H. Stanley, J.), dated November 28, 2011, modified to deny respondents' cross motion, reinstate the
holdover petition, grant petitioner-landlord's motion for summary judgment on its cause of action for possession, and permanently stay execution of the warrant of eviction on condition that respondents tender post-petition use and occupancy in an amount and within a time to be determined by Civil Court.

Since the record established beyond factual dispute that tenant failed to timely sign the proffered renewal lease (see Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2524.3[f]), landlord was entitled to summary judgment on its possessory cause of action (see 921 Fifth Ave. Assoc. v Eisenberg, 191 AD2d 396 [1993], appeal dismissed 82 NY2d 802 [1993]). However, in light of [*2]the fact that tenant effected a cure by signing the renewal lease, albeit belatedly (see 6 Greene St. Assocs. LLC v Robbins, 256 AD2d 169 [1998]), we permanently stay execution of the warrant of eviction on the condition stated above. Landlord's attempt to deny tenant a right to cure by injecting a nonprimary residence claim into this litigation was improper (see 235 W. 71 St. LLC v
Chechak, 16 AD3d 242 [2005]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: July 26, 2012