RAJEEV BEHL Vs. STATE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 17.102018 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Divisional Commissioner allowing respondent no.3's appeal preferred under Rule 22 (3) (4) of the Delhi Maintenance & Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009 (hereafter 'the said Rules').

(2.) By the impugned order, the Divisional Commissioner has directed that the petitioner be evicted from the property bearing no. 19, State Bank Colony, G.T. Karnal Road, Delhi -110009 (hereafter 'the property in question') within a period of 30 days from the date of the said order. The petitioner assails the impugned order on several fronts. First, it is submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable as the Divisional Commissioner has failed to consider an earlier order passed by the Additional District Magistrate on 18/21.07.2014, wherein it was observed that the matter pertains to a family dispute over the property. The petitioner claims that the said order had attained finality and, therefore, respondent no.3's complaint could not be entertained. Second, it is stated that since respondent no.3 had limited his relief only to evict the petitioner from the property in question and had not sought any maintenance, his complaint was not maintainable. Third, it is claimed that the Divisional Commissioner has failed to consider the material on record including the SDM's report, which indicated that the dispute is, essentially, a family dispute over the property. Fourth, that the property in question belongs to a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) of which the petitioner is a coparcener. The petitioner claims that he is, thus, entitled to enjoy the same. Fifth, that respondent no.3 has filed a suit for recovery of possession, permanent injunction and mesne profits (being CS (OS) 2423/2015 captioned S.K. Garg v Rajiv Bahl & Ors.) which is pending adjudication before this Court. The petitioner claims that the issue whether the property in question is a self-acquired property or HUF property, is an issue in the said action.

(3.) Briefly stated, the aforesaid controversy arises in the following context:-