MUKESH PURSWANI Vs. KARNANI PROPERTIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Judge 5th Bench in -charge Presidency Small Causes Court passed vide Order No. 60 dated 10.02.2016 in connection with Misc. Case No. 46 of 2016 (which arose from Ejectment Execution Case No. 89 of 2010) the present petitioner has filed this application for setting aside the impugned order and prayed for giving him a chance to contest in miscellaneous case under Order 21, Rule 97 /101 read with Sec. 151 of C.P.C. which is filed for a declaration that he is the tenant in respect of the suit premises and also for permanent injunction.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the learned Court below did not consider his application mainly on the ground that in connection with a direction of a Co -ordinate Bench of this High Court in C.O. 4453 of 2015 he has fixed the date of delivery of possession on 11.03.2016. Learned Court below further held that there was sufficient scope to recover the possession after delivery of possession and on the basis of his above finding he has rejected his application, wherein he wanted to get a declaration that he is the tenant in respect of the suit premises and for permanent injunction.

(3.) The main grievance of the petitioner is such that initially one Balinder Paul Sethi was the tenant of the premises vide Unit No. 417. That Balinder Paul Sethi died and thereafter the father of this petitioner had been in possession till he breathed his last. After the said demise of his father, he has been occupying the suit premises and has been paying the rent to the Residents ' Association and the said Residents ' Association was formed in terms of the order of this High Court and he has been paying rent to the Special Officer appointed by another Coordinate Bench of this Hon 'ble Court. The Special Officer concerned has been issuing receipts to him and the said Residents ' Association is also paying municipal taxes etc. Therefore, his possession is not disputed.