NASEEMA BEGUM Vs. MOHD JAVED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition under Section 115 CPC has been filed by the petitioner against the Judgment and Order dated 23rd August, 2011/7th October, 2011 passed by ASCJ -JSCC -GJ (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the petitioner for possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act and for permanent injunction in respect of the property bearing no. 7505 (part of property/house bearing Municipal No. 7503 to 7506), Qassabpura, Sadar Bazar, Delhi -06 (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property").

(2.) IT is stated by the petitioner that the suit property belongs to her and she has had constructive possession thereof through respondent No.7, her tenant and the petitioner was illegally, without her consent, without following due course of law, dispossessed from the suit property when the respondents No. 1 to 6 took possession of the suit property, illegally, from respondent No. 7. In view thereof the petitioner filed a civil suit for possession as well as permanent injunction against the respondents.

(3.) IT was stated by the petitioner that she had filed an eviction petition against the respondent No.7 which was pending adjudication at the time of filing the said suit while respondent No.7 had also filed a suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner which was however dismissed as withdrawn in view of the statement by the respondent No.7 that respondent no.7 has handed over the possession of the suit premises to the alleged owners i.e. respondents No. 1 to 6. In another suit for permanent injunction filed by the petitioner against the respondent No.7 for restraining him from subletting or parting with the suit premises, the respondent No.7 was stated to have filed a deed of surrender of tenancy. In the eviction petition, the respondents No. 1 to 6 had filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC claiming themselves to be the owner of the suit premises and also mentioning that they had been put in possession thereof by the respondent No.7