VINET DARGAR Vs. KRISHNA MOHAN DARGAR & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to order of this court dated 17.04.2017, the learned senior counsel for the plaintiff has clarified that an affidavit has been filed and placed on record. He reiterates on instruction that the phrase "concern" as used refers to M/s AMF Exports which was a family business and was the sole proprietorship concern of defendant No.1. It is stated that this M/s AMF Exports continues to operate. In addition, there is a company AMF Exports Pvt. Ltd. which has been impleaded as defendant No.4.

(2.) The above clarification is taken on record.

(3.) It is further stated by the plaintiff that subsequent to filing of the suit, the plaintiff was in possession of the property in Saket on the day of filing of the suit. He has now been dispossessed on 29.07.2014. I may point out that subsequent to filing of the written statement by defendant No.1, the plaintiff had filed an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC being I.A. No.12585/2015 which was allowed on 29.01.2016 whereby the defendant No.5 who was beneficiary of gift deed dated 11.03.2014 regarding the property at Saket was impleaded as a party.