BRIJ NANDAN GUPTA Vs. GEETA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the appellant impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 30.10.2013 and the first appellate court dated 30.9.2015 dismissing the suit of the appellant/plaintiff filed against the respondent/defendant for possession of the suit property which comprises of one room in the Flat No. 3/23A, Pocket A-3, Ground Floor, DDA Flats, Everest Apartment, Kalkaji Extension, New Delhi. The suit was dismissed inasmuch as the courts below have held that the respondent/defendant, being the daughter and one legal heir of Sh. Girdhari Lal Verma and his widow Smt. Bhagwati Devi, had never executed any NOC or relinquishment deed in favour of Smt. Bhagwati Devi after the death of her husband Sh. Girdhari Lal Verma who was the owner, and therefore, the appellant/plaintiff cannot be said to have purchased the entire Flat no. 3/23-A i.e flat purchased by the appellant/plaintiff would be less the share of the respondent/defendant in the flat in question.

(2.) The facts of the case are that admittedly Sh. Girdhari Lal Verma was the owner of the property being Flat no.3/23-A, Pocket-3, Ground Floor, DDA Flats, Everest Apartment, Kalkaji Extension, New Delhi. On the death of Sh. Girdhari Lal Verma it is pleaded by the appellant/plaintiff that his widow Smt. Bhagwati Devi became the sole owner of the property on account of her children, being two sons and two daughters; including the respondent/defendant/one daughter, had relinquished on 15.1.1993 their rights in the suit property in favour of their mother/Smt. Bhagwati Devi. Since the mother Smt. Bhagwati Devi, widow of Sh. Girdhari Lal Verma hence became the sole owner of the suit property, she had vide registered documents dated 7.8.2008 including the agreement to sell, power of attorney, Will etc transferred the Flat no. 3/23-A to the appellant/plaintiff. Since the respondent/defendant failed to vacate the suit property/room in the subject flat, the subject suit for possession was filed.

(3.) Respondent/defendant contested the suit and prayed for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the documents relied upon by the appellant/plaintiff executed by the mother Smt. Bhagwati Devi were forged and fabricated documents. It was also pleaded that neither the respondent/defendant nor her brothers and sisters ever signed any NOCs for transfer of the property in the name of the mother. It is pleaded that the appellant/plaintiff illegally got the documents of the flat in question executed in his name. It was further pleaded on behalf of the respondent/defendant that the suit has been filed after the death of the mother to extort money from the respondent/defendant. Accordingly, suit was prayed to be dismissed.