FATIMA SULTANA Vs. MOHD USMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) by the plaintiff in the suit. Reference to the plaintiff will include reference to the legal heirs of the plaintiff Fatima Sultana who has expired and is now represented by the appellant who is her legal heir. Fatima Sultana filed the subject suit seeking recovery of possession and mesne profits with respect to the property bearing no. 740 Kabadi Bazar, Jama Masjid, Delhi (situated on a plot of land admeasuring approximately 83 sq. yds) from the defendant Mohd. Usman, who has also expired pendente lite and is now represented by his legal heirs being the respondents herein.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that she had purchased the suit property from the Union of India, Ministry of Rehabilitation for a sum of Rs.9873/- vide a registered Sale Deed/Conveyance Deed dated 31.12.1963, Ex.PW5/1. It was claimed by the plaintiff that the defendant was in unauthorized occupation of the suit property, and therefore, suit for possession be decreed against the defendant and defendant be directed to pay mense profits.

(3.) The case of the defendant in the trial court was that he was a tenant in the suit property under the Ministry of Rehabilitation paying a monthly rent of Rs.8.50. Ownership of the plaintiff of the suit property is also denied and it was claimed that the plaintiff has got the suit property sold in her favour by using political pressure and the sale in plaintiff's favour was violative of the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the DPCR Act") and Rules framed thereunder.