VED RAM @ BED RAM Vs. KAMLESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cm No. 7281/2018 (exemption)

(2.) Appellant/Plaintiff claims that the suit property bearing No.44/1 was purchased by him from his father in terms of documentation dated 6.6.1997 being the Agreement to Sell, General Power of Attorney, Will, receipt etc and which have been proved by the appellant/plaintiff before the trial court as Ex.PW1/2 and Ex.PW1/3. The father Sh. Meer Singh expired on 24.9.2000. The case of the appellant/plaintiff was that his sister being the respondent/defendant requested the appellant/plaintiff for staying in two small rooms admeasuring 15x15 feet and which was allowed by the appellant/plaintiff on account of natural love and affection but the respondent/defendant failed to vacate the suit property in spite of termination of her licence w.e.f. 30.11.2005 in terms of the legal notice dated 9.9.2005, hence the subject suit was filed.

(3.) Respondent/Defendant contested the suit and pleaded that the respondent/defendant was not in possession of the property bearing No.44/1 but was owner and in possession of the property bearing No.87/1, Village Mochi Bagh, New Delhi and which property was sold to her by the father Sh. Meer Singh in terms of documentation dated 30.6.1997 being the General Power of Attorney, Will, Affidavit, etc. These documents were proved by the respondent/defendant as Ex.DW1/2 to Ex.DW1/5. Accordingly, it was prayed that the suit be dismissed as respondent/defendant is in possession of property bearing No.87/1 and not in possession of property bearing No.44/1.