SANTOSH DEVI Vs. OMBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No.9777/2014 (Delay in filing)

(2.) The Petitioner/Plaintiff filed a suit claiming that she was the landlady of House No. 326-B, Village Karkardooma, Shahdara, Delhi-92 and residing in the said premises along with her family for the last 30 years. It is stated that the Defendants/Respondents herein who are the husband and wife forcibly and illegally occupied one room under the tenancy of Shri Sarwan in the above said property who vacated the said premises pursuant to an execution of decree dated 31st March, 2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Delhi. However, after removal of the household goods from the said room by the concerned Bailiff, the Defendants did not go away but placed their goods in the middle of the courtyard and later on erected a temporary wooden hut/Jhuggi. Subsequently, the Defendant No.2/Respondent No.2 transferred her share and went to the village with all domestic articles on 19th September, 2009 and started living there. Thus the Plaintiff got possession of the entire property along with the courtyard. The Defendant No.2 at the instance of Defendant No.1 thereafter filed a suit and an application for reviewing the judgment and decree dated 17th January, 2007 which was dismissed vide order dated 30th January, 2009. The Defendants thereafter forcibly and illegally entered the house of the Plaintiff and trespassed into the portion admeasuring about 10 ft. x 10 ft. of the courtyard and erected a temporary wooden hut/Jhuggi by demolishing the bathroom of the Plaintiff and also converted it into a Pakka one without the consent of the Plaintiff. Thus the Defendants were unauthorized occupants and have no legal right to use the portion of the courtyard. Plaintiff also stated that the Defendants are trying to sublet, assign or part with the possession of the premises and create third party interest and thus a decree of possession of the demised premises/portion of the courtyard as per the site plan and permanent injunction from letting, assigning any part in possession or creating any third party interest is sought along with the mesne profits pendente-lite and future with interest thereon.

(3.) On the Defendants entering appearance they pleaded that there was no cause of action to file the suit and that the Plaintiff and Defendant Nos.2 were real sisters. Defendant No.2 was the owner of the property in question and the Plaintiff had no locus-standi to file the suit. The Defendants further denied having entered into the disputed property forcibly or illegally or trespassing into the portion/space admeasuring approximately 10ft x 10ft by dispossessing the Plaintiff. It was also denied that the Defendants erected temporary wooden hut/jhuggi without the consent of the Plaintiff or that they extended threats to the Plaintiff. It is stated that no incident took place on 4th August, 2010 and the suit be dismissed.