SANJAY SHARMA Vs. SUDHIR MALHOTRA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order dated 30.01.2019 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge-04, South East District, Saket Court, New Delhi ('ADJ'), in Civil Suit No. 8018/2016 dismissing the application of the appellant/plaintiff No.1 and the Respondent No.4/ Plaintiff No.2, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.

(2.) As per the factual matrix, the appellant and respondent no.4 jointly purchased an area of approximately 340 square feet, i.e, front portion of the basement of property No. A-249, Defence Colony, New Delhi vide registered Sale Deed dated 28.01.2003 from the respondent no.1. They claimed that the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 in collusion and connivance obtained a judgment and decree dated 21.10.2011 directing the appellant and the respondent no. 4 to deliver the possession of the property to the respondent no.3. It is also pleaded that the respondent no.3 has filed an execution of judgment and decree dated 21.10.2011 in which warrants of possession in respect of the said property have been issued.

(3.) It has been pleaded by the respondent no.3 in its written statement that the suit of the appellant and the respondent no.4 is without any cause of action and not maintainable, as they have already availed of the remedies under the law and after hearing them, the judgment and decree dated 21.10.2011 came to be passed in its favour against the appellant and the respondent no.4. The respondent no.3 further pleaded that the second round of ligation is nothing but an abuse of the process of court and has been initiated by the appellant and the respondent no.4 in order to frustrate the judgment and decree passed in favour of the respondent no.3.