AJIT SINGH Vs. PRAKASHI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case the mother, Smt. Prakashi Devi, respondent herein, has crossed swords against her son Shri Ajit Singh, the appellant herein. The facts of this case are these. The plaintiff/respondent had filed a suit for possession and recovery of damages/mesne profits in respect of property No. P 7D, Narela, Delhi. In the suit it was averred that the plaintiff/respondent is the owner of the said property which was given to her by her father. The defendant/appellant was in possession of four rooms on the ground floor as a licencee. The respondent terminated the licence of the appellant vide legal notice dated 16th April, 2001 and required the appellant to vacate the suit premises. The respondent had also claimed mesne profit for use and occupation of the suit property at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month from March 2001 till she got the actual possession of the suit premises.

(2.) THE defendant/appellant defended the above-said suit. He enumerated the following defences in support of his case. As a matter of fact, the suit property was purchased by his father, however, due to love and affection he got the name of his wife inserted as the vendee of the suit property. He explained that he is occupying the suit property in the capacity of an owner. A family settlement deed was executed between the family members during the life time of his father. The father of the appellant also executed a will bequeathing the property in dispute in favour of the appellant. The respondent has got no right, title or interest in respect of the property in dispute. The receipt of notice terminating the licence has also been denied.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties. The arguments urged by counsel for the appellant before this court has two prongs. He vehemently argued that the courts below have wrongly decided that the respondent herein is the absolute owner of the property in dispute. He, however, conceded that the plaintiff/respondent has proved on record the sale deed in her favour as Ex.PW-1/1 and khasra girdwari as Ex.PW = which go to show that the respondent is the absolute owner of the suit property.