SURINDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellants who were plaintiffs in the main suit. The said suit, which was registered as Suit No. 153/1997, was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants claiming that the appellants are tenants of Smt.Krishna Behl, defendant No.4, in respect of structures standing on Khasra No. 444/394/65-66, village Jhilmil Tahirpur, Delhi. It is alleged that they are tenants in respect of the said property since 1968 onwards and that they have been carrying on business of Kabari from the said property. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that the defendant No.3-Delhi Development Authority demolished the structures raised by the plaintiffs without any notice for which a civil writ petition was filed in this court which was, however, dismissed vide order dated December 11, 1997 on the ground that the writ petition gave rise to the disputed questions of facts. A liberty was granted to the appellants-plaintiffs to take recourse to the civil court and hence the present suit was filed by the plaintiffs seeking for a decree of declaration that the action of the Delhi Development Authority dated October 4, 1997 is null and void as the plaintiffs are the lawful tenants of defendant No.4 and, also for a decree for damages of Rs.4.75 lakhs together with interest to be paid to the plaintiffs with a further direction to the DDA to reconstruct the shops of the plaintiffs.

(2.) The aforesaid suit was contested by the defendants 1, 2 and 3. It was stated in the written statements that the plaintiffs were not the recorded owners of the land in question which falls within Khasra No. 395/267 and not in Khasra No. 444/394/65-66 as alleged. It is also stated that the suit land which is part of Khasra No. 395/267 was duly acquired by Award No. 61/72-73 and the said land was placed at the disposal of the D.D.A. vide notification under section 22 of the Delhi Development Act dated January 29, 1973. It is also stated that since unauthorised constructions on the said Khasra including the suit property had taken place, the same were demolished on October 4, 1996 and the plaintiffs were divested from the possession of the suit property. It is also categorically stated that defendant No.4 is not the owner of the said land. The suit was contested by three defendants, namely, Union of India; Secretary, Land and Building, and the Delhi Development Authority, whereas the defendant No.4, namely, Smt. Krishna Behl, the alleged owner of the land, did not appear and support the case of the plaintiffs.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, five issues were framed. The plaintiff examined five witnesses in the trial, whereas the defendants 1 and 2 examined Shri Sukhpal Singh, Kanungo, as D1/W1 and defendant No.3 examined Shri S.N. Tripathi, Patwari, as D3/W1. The defendant No.4 did not file any written statement and so was proceeded ex parte by order dated March 26, 1998. After receiving the evidence adduced by the parties, the learned trial court proceeded to hear the arguments in the suit and thereafter by judgment and decree dated February 28, 2004 dismissed the suit with no order as to costs.