K C TANEJA Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR TANEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of the application being I.A. No. 2825/1995 filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code praying for amendment of the plaint. The plaintiff instituted the present suit for possession and mense profit against the defendant in respect of the portion occupied by the defendant on the first floor of the House No. E-341, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi.

(2.) The case pleaded in the plaint is that the plaintiff is the absolute and exclusive owner of the aforesaid property being House No. E-341, Greater Kailash-II, new Delhi. After the purchase of the aforesaid plot of land, the plaintiff through his financial resources and income constructed the house thereon which is two and a half storeyed building. The plaintiff is living in the said house alongwith his wife and the youngest son ever since it was constructed by the plaintiff. One of the sons of the plaintiff, namely, the defendant has been living separately from the plaintiff since his childhood. The defendant got married in the year 1974 and he was staying in a flat allotted to him by the Delhi Development Authority at C-7/121, Lawrence Road, New Delhi. However, the defendant was transferred to Agra Region and accordingly the defendant requested the plaintiff that his family, namely, his wife and children as well as his aunt be allowed to be shifted temporarily to the first floor of the aforesaid properly at E-341, Greater Kailash, New Delhi, which was lying vacant at that time with the clear understanding that the defendant would dispose of the flat at Lawrence Road and purchase some bigger flat and that when the defendant is re-transferred back from Agra Region to Delhi, he would shift to his own flat. Keeping in view the relationship in between the plaintiff and the defendant and also considering his immediate need, the plaintiff al- lowed the family of the defendant to shift to the first floor premises of E-341, Greater Kailash, New Delhi and since then, the defendant is residing in the said portion of the properly, namely, first floor alongwith his family consisting of his wife, two children-as well as his aunt. However, inspite of the request being made by the plaintiff, the defendant has not vacated the suit premises and accordingly, the present suit has been instituted.

(3.) The defendant contested the aforesaid suit and filed a written statement contending, inter alia, that the suit property is a joint family property purchased out of the funds raised by sale of the ancestral properties and also through contribution made by the defendant as well. It is further stated that the said property was purchased for the benefit and encouragement of the family and the property being a joint family property, the defendant has a vested interest and right therein and is in rightful occupation thereof.