HEMA Vs. INDERJEET & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned judgment and decree dated 21.07.2018 passed by the court of learned Additional District Judge-02, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi ("ADJ") against the appellant and her husband (respondent No.2 herein) and in favour of respondent No.1 for possession and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property i.e. First Floor of property bearing No.9/4548, Gali No.5, Ajeet Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-110031 under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in Civil Suit No.2389/2016, is the subject matter of challenge in this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) By the impugned judgment, after appreciating the evidence adduced by both the parties, the learned ADJ found that the respondent No.1/plaintiff was proved to be the absolute owner of the above said property and the petitioner and the respondent No.2 were unauthorized occupants/trespassers therein and they were intending to create third party interest in the suit property.

(3.) Admittedly, the respondent No.2 is the son of respondent No.1 and also the husband of the petitioner. The learned ADJ relied upon an judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joseph Severance & Ors. Vs. Benny Mathew & Ors., 2005 8 JT 509, holding that "A child resides in the house of his parents under permissive possession and not strictly as a licensee". It was also held that "No rights akin to the rights of a licensee are available to the child."