RAMA KANTA JAIN Vs. M S JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit for recovery of possession over a portion of the property bearing No. 49/7, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi, shown by red colour in the plan annexed with the plaint ( hereinafter referred to as the disputed property for the sake of convenience) and for recovery of mesne profits to the tune of Rs. 1400.00 for use and occupation of the same . The plaintiff also claims pendente lite and future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 2100.00 per mensem.

(2.) Brief facts which are required to be gone into for the purposes of disposal of the present suit are as under: that the plaintiff is the sole owner of the property bearing house No. 49, RoadNo.7, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. The plot of land for construction of the said house was purchased by the plaintiff from one Shri Tek Chand through registered sale deed dated April 25, 1964. The disputed property was was got mutated in the name of the plaintiff in the record of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on June 17, 1964. The construction of the disputed property on the said plot was got done during the years 1964-65. The completion and occupancy certificate dated January 13, 1965 was also issued in favour of the plaintiff by the Municipal Corportion of Delhi. The plaintiff had also obtained four electric connections and two water connections in the year 1965 in her name for the better and proper use of the disputed property. The house tax in respect of the disputed property is also being assessed in the name of the plaintiff and is being regularly paid by her. The plaintiff rented out the disputed property to different tenants and had been collecting the rent from them till the year 1971.

(3.) Defendant No.1 is the real elder brother of the husband of the plaintiff. Defendants Nos. 2,4 and 6 are the sons of defendant No.1. Defendants Nos. 3,5 and 7 are the daughters-in-law of defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 was in government service and retired in the year 1970. Defendant No.1 was in occupation of a government flat No. 46A, Pandara Road, New Delhi, till his retirement. The plaintiff and her other family members were also residing with defendant No.1 in the said official accommodation. They shifted to a portion in the disputed property shown by green colour in the site plan in April 1971. The two lofts over bath rooms and latrines shown by yellow colour are also in occupation of the plaintiff. The defendants were permitted on their request, out of love and affection for them to occupy a portion of the disputed property shown by red colour as licensees. The defendants now with ulterior motives have refused to vacate the disputed property despite requests to that effect. The license of the defendants was cancelled on May 8, 1984 when they got constructed a house of their own bearing No. B-239, Prashant Vihar, Delhi. Consequently they were served with a notice dated September 20, 1984 whereby they were requested in writing to vacate the disputed property on or before October 10, 1984. However, even then the defendants have refused to vacate the disputed property. Since the defendants have failed to vacate the disputed property they are liable to pay damages to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 2100.00 per month with effect from October 11,1984 onwards. The defendants are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1400.00 to the plaintiff being the mesne profits for the period from October 11,1984 to the date of the institution of the suit i.e., October 30, 1984 at the abovesaid rate. In the above circumstances the plaintiff was compelled to bring forward the present suit.