AJIT SINGH GILL Vs. ARVIND KHOSLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Initially, Suit No. 234/1997 was filed by Shri Ajit Singh Gill, his wife and two sons on 3.2.1997 seeking permanent injunction restraining defendants No. 1, 3 & 4 from interfering with their possession of property No. 324, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, New Delhi and taking its illegal possession from them. The plaint was thereafter amended so as to seek possession of the first, second and third floors of the aforesaid property from defendants No. 1, 3 and 4. They have also sought injunction, restraining defendants No. 1, 3 & 4 from interfering with their possession of the aforesaid property and taking its illegal possession from them. Suit No. 2226/2001 has been filed by them seeking an amount of Rs 32 lac as damages.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff No. 1, who is carrying the business under the name and style of Simran Creations took on rent the whole of property bearing No. 324, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, comprising basement, ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor, which was jointly owned by defendant Nos. 1 and 2, from defendant No. 2 in January, 1996 at the rent of Rs 12,000/- per month. It is alleged that since arrears of Corporation Tax amounting to Rs 19.62 lac had accumulated in respect of the suit property and MCD had issued notice for its auction in order to recover its dues, the matter was discussed between defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and defendant No. 1 asked defendant No. 2 to explore the possibility of sale of the aforesaid property. Plaintiff No.1, who was a family friend of the defendants, was apprised of in this regard and he offered to purchase the property at the market price. Defendant No. 1 agreed to sell his share of the property to the plaintiffs and asked defendant No. 2 who held a Power of Attorney from him, to execute the sale deed on his behalf. Defendant No. 2, after informing defendant No. 1 in this regard, sold the suit property to the plaintiffs and executed sale deeds in their favour. The share of defendant No. 1 in the sale consideration, amounting to Rs 8,62,500/- was sent to him by post and was accepted by him.

(3.) It is further alleged that on 24th January, 1997, plaintiff No. 1 was informed that defendant No. 1 along with defendants 3 and 4 had forcibly removed the staff of Simran Creations and locked the premises. On reaching Delhi on 29th January, 1997, plaintiff No. 1 visited the suit property and found anti-social elements sitting inside the gate. The police was called by him and on seeing the police personnel, those anti-social elements ran away, leaving one security man on the spot, who was taken to the police station. Defendants 1, 3 and 4 placed locks over the lock of plaintiff No.1 in order to obstruct his ingress and egress and also deployed anti-social elements outside the suit property.