ALKA SAIGAL Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 27th March, 2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, New Delhi dismissing the appeal bearing RCA No.13/2011 titled Sh.Nirmal Saigal Thr. LRs Vs. UOI & Ors.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the appellant (Nirmal Saigal (since deceased, now represented through his LR Smt. Alka Saigal) filed a suit bearing No.149/2010 for declaration and injunction against M/s Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd. It was stated in the plaint that the property bearing Khasra no.472/2, situated within the Revenue Estate of Village Arak Pur, Bagh Mochi, Delhi presently known as block No.39 and 48, Keventer Lane, Sardar Patel Marg, New Delhi measuring 22.95 acres was initially leased out to Mr.Edward Keventer vide perpetual lease deed dated 16.10.1920. It was averred in the plaint that Mr.Edward Keventer died in 1937 and during his life time, he had executed a Will bequeathing the suit property in favour of his son one Mr.W.Keventer. The property was kept mutated in the record of L&DO in the name of Mr.W.Keventer on 3.8.1942. Mr.W.Keventer is alleged to have sold the property to one M/s Edward Keventer Ltd. Calcutta. It was further averred that M/s Edward Keventer Ltd. further sold the property to Late Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal, the father of the plaintiff on 15.5.1946 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/ - vide a registered conveyance/sale deed. It was averred that the possession of the suit property was also delivered to Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal and the property was also mutated in the record of the L&DO in favour of Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal on 16.11.1946. On 6th June, 1946, M/s Edward Keventer (successors) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi(respondent no.3 herein) alleged to have come into existence and it was alleged that the father of the plaintiff namely Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal was alleged to have handed over the possession of the suit land to the respondent no.3 as a sub -lessee in the year 1950. Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal was averred to have shifted his residence to Bombay and thus, the respondent no.3 came to be in possession of the land of the appellant.

(3.) IT was further alleged that the respondent no.3 filed a writ petition in High Court of Delhi claiming itself to be the lessee in respect of the property since 1920 and sought appropriate relief in this regard. The appellant is alleged to have moved an application for being impleaded, however, the said application was dismissed on 22.8.2008 granting liberty to the appellant to take such appropriate action against the respondent no.3 as may be permissible in law. It was alleged that the respondent no.3 is claiming itself to be the owner on the basis of a release deed dated 13.5.1950 alleged to have been executed by her father. It was further alleged that the release deed was in violation of Section 23 of the Registration Act, 1860 and it was without any consideration and, therefore, was an invalid document. It was also alleged that the said document could not be stated to be a gift deed or the release deed. It further alleged to have been executed by Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal with the help of attorney named Sh.Jamna Dass. It was stated that the father of the appellant Sh.Narendra Nath Saigal was hale and hearty at all times in the year 1950 and there was no question of appointing Jamna Dass as the attorney for the purpose of execution of the release deed in favour of the respondent no.3. It was stated that the cause of action to file the suit had accrued in favour of the appellant in the year 1908 for the first time when the permission of housing society granted by the L&DO to the respondent no.3 was withdrawn. It further arose in favour of the appellant as an application filed by her for impleadment in a writ petition was dismissed on 3.8.2008 and since the said cause of action to sue continues, therefore, she has chosen to file a suit for declaration claiming herself to be the owner of the suit land and has stated that the release deed dated 13.5.1950 purported to have been executed by her late father Sh. N.N.Saigal is non -existent and a forged and fabricated document.