YASHWANT SINGH Vs. ASHUTOSH VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A.11037/2021 (of plaintiff u/O XXXIX R-2A CPC r/w Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971)

(2.) Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff has submitted that by the order dated 21.12.2012, this court had disposed of certain applications filed by both the parties with the following directions:

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff submits that despite the directions of this court restraining the respondent/defendant from interfering or causing hindrances in the usage of the basement, ground and second floors of the property being A-24, Kailash Colony, New Delhi ( 'suit property ' for short), the respondent/defendant had actually prevented the applicant/plaintiff from accessing these areas. Specifically, it is alleged in the application that when the applicant/plaintiff had come from Patna to Delhi on 27th August, 2021 at about 9:45 PM, the applicant/plaintiff was beaten badly by the respondent/defendant and his goons when he wanted to enter his own premises. On 24th August, 2021 at about 9:00 AM, the respondent/defendant had also disconnected the electricity connection to the ground floor of the suit premises and tried to make four CCTV cameras installed at the ground floor non-functional, and when the domestic help and Chokidar of the applicant/plaintiff had objected to it, they were beaten badly and thrown out of the compound. It is submitted, that thereafter, the respondent / defendant had removed the marble name plate of the applicant/plaintiff and had fixed a name plate in which he had only mentioned his name. The car of the applicant/plaintiff standing in the compound was also removed out of the suit premises. The CCTV cameras on the second and third floors were also removed on 18th August, 2021 at about 8:00 PM by the respondent/defendant and thereafter the locks on the second unit of the second floor and the entrance of the third floor were broken. On that night, the Chokidar and his wife and the domestic help of the applicant/plaintiff were manhandled as well. These people were also prevented from going up to the second floor. On all these occasions, the Police were alerted, yet the respondent/defendant continued with his acts of interference. Thus, the application was necessitated.