RICHA DEVI Vs. RAM DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 3.7.2004 and the first appellate court dated 5.10.2013; by which, the suit of the respondent -plaintiff for possession and mesne profits with respect to the property bearing no. 183, Tilak Khand, Giri Nagar, Kalkaji, New Delhi was decreed.

(2.) THE facts of the case as pleaded by the respondent -plaintiff was that he was allotted this quarter being an industrial worker and at one stage since he ceased to be an industrial worker, the department informed him that the allotment would be cancelled, and at which stage, the respondent -plaintiff requested that the property be transferred to the name of Jeevan Lal, late husband of the appellant -defendant. However, ultimately this quarter was not allotted to Jeevan Lal and the respondent -plaintiff Sh. Ram Dass continued to be the owner of the suit property.

(3.) BOTH the courts below have held that the allotment in favour of respondent -plaintiff was never cancelled and no allotment was ever granted in favour of Jeevan Lal, late husband of the appellant. Courts below have referred to the fact that the document Ex.RW2/1 dated 7.12.1979 is not issued by the department and appropriate noting states that this fact has been proved on record as Ex.RDW3/R -1. In fact the aspect that there could not be allotment to Jeewan Lal, husband of the plaintiff was communicated to Jeewan Lal vide letter dated 14.4.1981 which has been proved as Ex. RDW3/R -2. Even the bank draft which was sent was also returned to the appellant -defendant vide letter of the department dated 18.3.1997, Ex.RDW3/R4. Accordingly both the courts below have held that the respondent -plaintiff continued to be the owner of the suit property and therefore the suit for possession and mesne profits was decreed.