LAWS(DLH)-1973-7-7

SUKHDEV RAJ NANDA Vs. P D AHUJA

Decided On July 30, 1973
SUKHDEV RAJ NANDA Appellant
V/S
P.D.AHUJA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the decree dated the 20th of November, 1962 made by Shri M.L. Mirchia, Sub Judge 1st Class, Delhi by which he dismissed the appellants, suit for possession, raises the short question whether the respondent was a tenant in the property in suit and could avail of the protection enuring out of that status.

(2.) The appeal arises out of a suit instituted by Shukhdev Raj Nanda and Smt. Lila Nanda against the present respondent for the possession of house No. 1112-12 (new) situated at Gail No. 12, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, Delhi and for the recovery of Rs. 75,0000 as damages and mesne profits or license fee for the period 12-5-1958.

(3.) The plaintiffs alleged that they were the owners of the property in suit which had originally belonged to Chaudhari Noor Mohd. who had mortgaged the same with possession with M/s. Ideal Bank Ltd., Fatehpuri, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 15,000.00. Chaudhary Noor Mohd. had subsequently created further mortgages on the said house in favour of M/s. Ideal Bank Ltd. for various loans advanced to him. The mortgagor having left for Pakistan the house was declared as evacuee property and on the application preferred by the Ideal Bank Ltd. the Competent Officer held that it was a composite property which was to be sold by public auction. The plaintiffs alleged that they had purchased the house on the 18th of March, 1958 at the auction held by the Competent Officer for a sum of Rs. 23,200.00 and the sale was confirmed on the 12th of May, 1958. It was asserted in paragraph 6 of the plaint that defendant the respondent herein) was in unauthorised occcupation of the house and had no right, interest or whatsoever to remain in possession. It was emphasised that the defendants's possession was that of a trespasser and at any rate not more than that of a licensee. Paragraph 7 stated that the plaintiffs had given registered notices dated the 15th of October, 1958 and the 25th of October 1958 to the defendant calling upon him to vacate the house and deliver its possession to them with which he had not complied.