RAMESH CHANDER GUPTA Vs. KANTA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent which was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge. The appellant's first appeal has been dismissed. The appellant has approached this Court in second appeal. For the sake of convenience, the appellant and the respondent are referred as per their rank in the plaint as 'plaintiff" and 'defendant', respectively.

(2.) THE plaintiff and the defendant jointly purchased shop No. 8, Market A -5B/A -5C, Janak Puri, New Delhi measuring 136.25 square feet (hereinafter referred to as the "suit property") from Delhi Development Authority in an auction on 19th May, 1975. The plaintiff claims to have paid the entire sale consideration of Rs.29,200/ -. The plaintiff further claims that the defendant's name was added merely for the sake of giving respect to the defendant being his elder sister -in -law (The defendant is the wife of the plaintiff's elder brother). The plaintiff claims to be in continuous, uninterrupted and exclusive possession of the suit property from the date of the purchase. The plaintiff further claims that he was carrying on the business in the name of his proprietorship concern "Sandeep Store" in the suit property. The name of the proprietorship concern was later changed to "Janak Corner". The plaintiff relies on the registration certificate of the establishment in the name of his proprietorship concern. The plaintiff seeks declaration of sole, exclusive and absolute ownership of the suit property on account of long, continuous and uninterrupted possession for more than 12 years and permanent injunction from restraining the defendant from selling, transferring or alienating the same.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing of the appeal that the plaintiff has become sole, exclusive and absolute owner of the suit property by adverse possession. It is submitted that the plaintiff paid the entire sale consideration of the suit property at the time of auction and the name of the defendant was added only to give respect to her being his elder sister -in -law. The plaintiff had been carrying on the business in the name of his proprietorship concern earlier as "Sandeep Store" and now as "Janak Corner". The plaintiff is also paying the property taxes. It is further submitted that the defendant instituted a suit for permanent/mandatory injunction against the plaintiff in July, 1984, which was dismissed in default on 11th October, 1988. The defendant did not challenge the order of dismissal and therefore, the defendant has given up her rights in the suit property. Law with respect to adverse possession