SUBHASH CHAND JAIN Vs. SAVITA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellants (Original Defendants) are aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dtd. 4/12/2021 ('Impugned Judgment') passed by the ADJ-01, Shahdara, Karkardooma, Delhi in CS No. 670/2020 titled as Savita Devi and Anr. Vs Subhash Chand Jain and Anr.

(2.) Vide the Impugned Judgment, the learned Trial Court was pleased to allow the Applications filed by the Respondents (Original Plaintiffs) under (i) Order XXXIX Rule 10 CPC and (ii) Order XII Rule 6 CPC. While allowing the said Applications, the learned Trial Court, vide the Impugned Judgment, was pleased to hold that the Respondents are entitled to decree of possession and accordingly directed the Appellants to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the shop on the ground floor portion as well as the basement below the said shop of the property bearing No. X-3998-A, Gali No.14, Shanti Mohalla, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-110031 ('Suit Property') to the Respondents. Learned Trial Court further directed the Appellants to pay the admitted rent @ Rs.40,000.00 (Rs.25,000.00 for the ground floor and Rs.15,000.00 for the basement) per month to the Respondents from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of vacation of the Suit Property. The issue of mesne profit is still pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court.

(3.) This Court disposed of the present Appeal earlier vide Judgment dtd. 21/12/2022 based on the consent of the parties. As per the said consent Judgment dtd. 21/12/2022, the Appellants agreed to vacate the Suit Property by 20/3/2023. However, the Appellants now prefers an application for recalling of the said Judgment dtd. 21/12/2022 (CM No. 11264/2023) on the ground that the counsel representing the Appellants at that time acted without his instructions and gave consent on their behalf before this Court. The Appellants have also filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Delhi against the said Advocate, Mr. Ankit Tandon who was representing the Appellants at that time.