VIJAY KUMAR Vs. MUNNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The costs imposed on 3.1.2014 are waived. Let the appeal be argued.

(2.) This first appeal under Section 43 (i) (r) of CPC impugns the order of the trial court dated 25.11.2013 by which the appellant/plaintiff's application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was dismissed.

(3.) Appellant/plaintiff has filed the subject suit for injunction claiming ownership of the subject property being plot no.66, admeasuring 111 sq. yds., Rect. No.11, Out of K.No. 10/2, Revenue Estate of Village Burari, Delhi. As per the plaint, the case of the appellant-plaintiff was that in January, 2012, plaintiff had mortgaged the said property with the respondent no.1 for a sum of Rs.4.50 lacs. It is further the case of the plaintiff that defendants agreed that on the plaintiff mortgaging the suit property, the respondents-defendants will pay a sum of Rs.4.50 lacs to the plaintiff. Appellant-plaintiff claimed that on 10.1.2012, a mortgaged deed was executed and he only retained a photocopy. The case of the plaintiff is that when he approached defendants on 9.5.2013 to give back the loan amount, and return the property documents, the defendants allegedly tore the photocopy of the mortgage deed which was with the appellant-plaintiff. The subject suit thereafter was filed seeking injunction to restrain the respondents-defendants etc. from interfering with the peaceful use and enjoyment of the suit property. Mandatory injunction also was claimed that respondents-defendants should handover the original title documents of the suit property back to the plaintiff.