SHAKEEL AHMAD Vs. FAIZ AHMAD AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff urges that in view of the admissions made by the Defendants, a decree can be drawn in terms of Order -XII, R -6, CPC. The plaintiff is an undivided owner, and occupant of nd a portion of the suit property -D -619, 2 floor, Saeedia Masjid, Chauhan Bangar, Shahdara.

(2.) IT is stated that the first and second Defendants are in occupation of the first floor and open roof and store, on the second floor. The plaintiff has produced a plan of the property in support of the suit. It is stated that the suit property was originally purchased by the plaintiff's father and the Defendants (i.e. Late Shri Mahmood Ali) who died on 20.05.2009. It is further submitted that apart from the present three parties, one Shri Khalil Ahmad (who has been described in paragraph -3 (c) of the suit) is also another brother entitled to the share in the property. The plaintiff apprehends that the Defendants would dispose of the entire property and, therefore, seeks injunctive reliefs. The Defendants in the written statement firstly state that one of the necessary parties i.e. Khalil Ahmad has not been impleaded. It is also submitted that the Defendants are residing in a portion of the property i.e. the first floor and are in occupation of the part of the second floor and that they have no intention at present to dispose of the property or create any third party rights. They also argue that a common portion of the ground floor is in their possession. It is submitted that the Defendants never intended to sell or create any third party interest in the property. The relevant admission in the written statement is as follows:

(3.) APART from the above, the Defendants' written statement also contends that the plaintiff ought to have sought for a decree of partition and not having done so and also not having impleaded one of the necessary party, the suit has to fail.