RENU SINGH Vs. RAJIV RASTOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application of the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for interim injunction is for consideration.

(2.) THE lis between the parties pertains to the rights of the respective parties with respect to an area admeasuring 450 sq ft. , towards rear of property No. E-28, South Extension - II, New Delhi. It is not in dispute that the plaintiff is the owner of the rear ground floor portion of the said property comprising not only of the aforesaid area of 450 sq ft but also of constructed portion of two rooms together with W. C. The entire property E-28, South Extension - II, new Delhi was originally purchased by one Shri Bhagat Saran Bhatnagar from DLF housing and Construction Pvt Ltd, the Developer of the Colony of South extension. Shri Bhagat Saran Bhatnagar bequeathed the said property to his son shri Guru Saran Bhanagar. Shri Guru saran Bhatnagar sold the rear portion of the property comprising of two rooms on the ground floor together with WC and area of 450 sq ft aforesaid which was described as covered courtyard and improvised garage, except the portion of the area falling below the staircase, vide sale deed dated 23rd December, 1981 registered on 24th December, 1981 to one Smt Indira Rani. In the said sale deed it is inter alia recorded that though Shri Guru Saran Bhatnagar will have the right to raise construction above the two rooms and WC on the ground floor sold to Smt Indira Rani but he will have no right to raise construction over the covered courtyard and improvised garage admeasuring 450 sq ft which is described in the sale deed as the absolute property of the purchaser Indira rani. The sale deed does not give any right to the purchaser Smt Indira Rani also to build any further structure over the existing covered courtyard but gave Smt Indira Rani a right to install a water tank, a cooling tower, cooler or an airconditioner in portion admeasuring 138. 75 sq. ft. above the courtyard in a designated portion.

(3.) THE plaintiff claims to be the successor-in-interest of the said Smt Indira rani and through several other purchasers in the interregnum. The defendants claim to be the owners of the first and second floor of the property. The plaintiff, however, contends that the defendants can be the owner of the first and second floor excluding the portion of 450 sq ft above the covered courtyard and improvised garage aforesaid. The defendants challenge even the right of shri Guru Saran Bhatnagar to, on 24th December, 1981 i. e. date of registration of sale deed, sell/transfer the rights above ground floor level in the aforesaid 450 sq ft area, for the reason of having prior thereto on 23rd december, 1991 sold the said rights to the person whose successor-in-interest the defendants claim to be. The defendants have also pleaded that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff and the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants had on 10th December, 1993 executed an Mou whereunder the plaintiff's predecessor was permitted to and did make construction at the level of ground floor in place of covered courtyard and improvised garage and of a basement under her portion at the rear of the ground floor including below 450 sq ft aforesaid and had permitted the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants to raise construction above the level of ground floor, where earlier covered courtyard and improvised garage existed. The defendants further claim that the first and second floor above the space of erstwhile improvised garage and courtyard was constructed in 1993-1994 itself; they have also filed certain documents in support of the said plea.