SATYA DEVI Vs. RATI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and decree passed on 10.12.1997 by Ms. Manju Goel, Additional District Judge, Delhi is under challenge in this appeal. The Trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff/appellant on recording finding on issue No. 1 only.

(2.) Facts in brief are that on 16.12.1963 suit was filed by the plaintiff/ appellant against the defendant/respondent claiming a decree for possession of property No. 257, Block-A, Defence Enclave, Madhu Vihar, Village Palam, New Delhi measuring 200 sq. yards from out of Khasra No. 108/18, as shown in the site plan. The plaintiff also claimed decree for mesne profits at the rate of Rs.,000.00 per month with effect from 1.3.1992 till delivery of possession. Inbrief the plaintiff alleged that the property was purchased by her from defendants I and 2 by means of a registered sale deed duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Delhi on 11.17.1984 . Relevant documents regarding transfer/assignment of the plot were later executed in favour of Daya Kishan Jain, who later on transferred and assigned his legal rights, title and interest in favour of Nirmala Devi. Plaintiff had also executed power of attorney in favour of Daya Kishan Jain. Pursuant to the said power of attorney Daya Kishan Jain executed a power of attorney in favour of Nirmala Devi. On 31.1.1991 defendants I and 2 with their aids tried to demolish the room constructed on the property. Because of this thret, suit had to be filed for permanent injunction, which was decreed on 4.9.1991. Defendants land 2 were restrained from dispossessing the plainiff forcibly from the plot in question. On 4.3.1992 execution petition was filed against defendants 1 to 4 seeking enforcement of the decree. Plaintiff also filed an application for initiating contempt proceedings. Plaintiff's attorney Smt. Nirmala Devi had gone to Calcutta and in her absence on 1.3.1992 the defendant broke open the locks of the property and took possession of the same thereby necessitating filing of suit for possession and mesne profits. The plaint was signed and verified by Smt. Nirmala Devi as attorney of the plaintiff.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants/respondents, who filed separate written statements.