HOLIDAY HOME Vs. R P KAPUR HUF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review application has been filed by the unsuccessful appellant-defendant for reviewing the judgment dated 20th December, 2010 whereby the appeal filed by it against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in a suit for possession and mesne profits etc. filed against it by the respondent-plaintiff directing its eviction from the suit property, was dismissed by this Court. The facts which only are relevant for the disposal of this review application may be noticed first. The respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter to be referred as 'the plaintiff') had filed a suit for recovery of possession, mesne profits etc. against the review petitioner/appellant/defendant ('hereinafter to be referred as 'the defendant') inter-alia, in respect of the suit property on the ground that after the termination of its tenancy it had no right to remain in possession of the suit property which was let out to it by the plaintiff in the year 1980. The defendant had contested the suit, inter-alia, on the grounds that the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the suit as it was not the owner of the suit property.

(2.) During the trial, the defendant had examined one official from the Delhi Development Authority as one of its witnesses and he had deposed that the lease of the land on which the suit property was built had been cancelled in the year 1972 and its formal(symbolic) possession was taken over in the year 1984(as noticed already the suit property was let out to the defendant by the plaintiff in the year 1980). Relying upon that statement of its defence witness the defendant had urged before the trial Court that with the cancellation of the lease of the land by DDA the plaintiff could not maintain the suit for possession etc. The learned trial Court dealt with this submission in its judgment in the following manner:-

(3.) Finally, the suit came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant was directed to vacate the suit property. Feeling aggrieved by the decision of the trial Court, the defendant had filed an appeal before this Court. During the pendency of the appeal the defendant had filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC (being C.M.No. 9422/09) seeking permission to place on record certain documents which showed that the Estate Officer had already initiated proceedings under the Public Premises(Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act for the eviction of the defendant from the suit property as a result of the cancellation of the lease of the land under the suit property by the Delhi Development Authority, the paramount lessor. In respect of that application this Court had recorded the consent of the counsel for the plaintiff on 21.07. 2009 that those documents could be taken into consideration by this Court while deciding the appeal but without prejudice to its stand that the on-going proceedings before the Estate Officer had no effect on the plaintiff's right to get back the possession of the suit property from the defendant.