SURINDER KUMAR Vs. MADHU BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by defendant No. 2 arising out of a suit for possession which was decreed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1. The facts giving rise to the filing of the suit may be summarized as under:

(2.) THE suit property bearing plot No. 10 measuring 333 sq. yds. situated in Khasra No. 93/9/1 at C-51, Vijay Vihar, Phase-II, Village Rithala, Delhi, originally belonged to Vijay Singh,pw-l as a part of his ancestral property.

(3.) BRIEFLY stated the plaintiff's case is that she had purchased the suit property on 23. 01. 1984 vide a registered sale deed from Vijay Singh for Rs. 6000/ -. The plaintiff further stated that a boundary wall demarcated the suit property and five rooms were constructed on the plot. It was further stated that she along with her husband regularly visited the suit property for the purpose of looking after the property. In the year 1989, defendant No. l-respodnentno. 4 Gurdeep Kaur filed a suit for permanent injunction against the plaintiff stating that the plaintiff had illegally and in an unauthorized manner, occupied the suit property. Subsequently the suit for permanent injunction against the plaintiff was dismissed yet the defendants continued to occupy the suit property.