JATINDER KHANDUJA Vs. JAGDISH KHANDUJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is the impugned judgment and decree dated 29.08.2016 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge-03, (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (in short "?learned ADJ "?) in Civil Suit No. 16493/2016 (Old civil suit no.63/2016) by which the suit of the respondent/plaintiff for possession of 3rd Floor of property No. 29/152, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi (as shown in red colour in the site plan Ex.PW-1/3) was decreed against his real brother who is the appellant/defendant. The learned ADJ has also restrained the appellant/defendant by a decree of permanent injunction from creating third party interest or parting with the possession of the suit premises in any manner.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff claimed to be the owner of the entire property bearing no.29/152, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi by virtue of a Gift Deed dated 10.10.1997 executed in his favour by his father late Nand Lal Khanduja, which was duly registered with the office of Sub-Registrar, Delhi.Admittedly, the suit property is consisting of ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor. The respondent/plaintiff has also applied for mutation of the property and he was informed by the Land & Development Office by letter dated 25.03.2003 about the mutation. It is alleged by the respondent/plaintiff that at the time of construction, he had spent substantial amount towards construction of the house from his funds along with his father. He further alleged that after execution of the said Gift Deed, his father was of the opinion that the respondent/plaintiff should not throw out any of his brothers from the said property during his lifetime and for that reason he allowed his brothers to stay in the property. It is further alleged that in the year 1998, the appellant/defendant, having come to know about the execution of the said Gift Deed, started harassing and creating unnecessary tension in the family, colluding with his other brothers and filing false complaints before the police authorities in order to pressurize their father late Nand Lal Khanduja to gift the third floor of the said property to the appellant/defendant.

(3.) The respondent/plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 08.09.2004 to the appellant/defendant asking him to handover the physical and vacant possession of the property under his occupancy failing which the appellant/defendant shall be liable to pay the damages and misuse charges w.e.f. 01.10.2004. The respondent/plaintiff received a reply dated 27.09.2004 from the appellant/defendant.