LAWS(DLH)-1993-9-30

KULBIR SINGH Vs. STATE

Decided On September 07, 1993
KULBIR SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Proceduce for issue of an ad interim injunction restraining respondent No.2. Mrs. Indra Paintal, or any other person who might be inducted into the property by the said respondent, her servants and agents from carrying out any construction or parting with possession over the plot bearing No. A-2/121, Safdarjang Development Residential Scheme, New Delhi, till the disposal of the probate petition.

(2.) Brief facts which gave rise to the present case are as under: that the petitioner has filed a probate petition No. 45/89 wherethrough he seeks probate in respect of the registered will dated February 19,1973 made by the deceased Smt. Dhan Kaur i.e. his mother in favour of the petitioner. The deceased left behind a plot bearing No. A-2/121, Safdarjang Development Residential Scheme, New Delhi. The deceased breathed her last on January 13,1977 at Holy Family Hospital. New Delhi. The deceased through the said will bequeathed to the petitioner the said plot of land.

(3.) The petitioner is not a resident of India and has been residing continuously abroad. The petitioner received from the Delhi Development Authority, respondent No.5, addressed to the testratrix Smt. Dhan Kaur that the lease in respect of the said plot of land would be cancelled if the constructions were not raised on the said plot of land as the lease inrespect of the said plot was granted for the purpose of raising construction for residential purposes. In the abovesaid circumstances the petitioner requested his sister i.e. respondent No.2 to approach the DDA for the property being mutated in favour of the heirs of the testatrix i.e. the petitioner and respondents No.2 and 3 as the petitioner at that time was not in possession of the original will nor a copy thereof. In view of the above, the said property was got mutated in the joint names of the petitioner and respondents No.2 and 3 in order to preclude the DDA from cancelling the lease deed in favour of the deceased. Later on, certain constructions were raised on the said plot of land (for short 'the disputed property'). A completion certificate was also issued.