LAWS(DLH)-2014-7-432

OM PRAKASH ARORA Vs. ARCHANA LALL

Decided On July 14, 2014
OM PRAKASH ARORA Appellant
V/S
Archana Lall Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Caveat 576/2014

(2.) In the written statement appellant took various preliminary objections. On merits it was stated that respondent had claimed herself to be owner of entire upper ground floor without roof rights in respect of property bearing no. H-95/A-1, Gali No. 2 situated at Gobind Garh, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, whereas, premises in occupation of appellant was one portion of the ground floor of the shop bearing no. H-16/95, Gali No. 2, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Even Power of Attorney executed by the respondent in favour of Shri Sunil Kumar Soni was in respect of property bearing no. H-95/A-1, Gali No. 2 situated at Gobind Garh, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi; whereas number of suit premises was H-16/95, Gali No. 2, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Appellant had earlier filed a suit against the respondent for permanent injunction wherein, in para 10 of the plaint, it was stated that despite having paid the rent regularly respondent did not issue any rent receipt. Rent upto July, 2010 had already been paid. Respondent was trying to dispossess the appellant from the suit premises bearing no. H-16/95, Gali No. 2, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi therefore, appellant filed a suit for injunction against the respondent. In the said suit, respondent no. 2, namely, Shri S.K. Soni and respondent no. 3, namely, Rajender Ashija @ Babu Ashija made a joint statement in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Delhi to the effect that they will not dispossess the appellant from the property bearing no. H-16/95, Gali No. 2, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. In view of the said statement suit was withdrawn by the appellant. Appellant had spent Rs.5-6 lacs on renovation of the suit premises. No written rent agreement was executed containing the terms of tenancy between the parties. It was further stated in para 8 of the written statement that appellant had wrongly terminated the tenancy on the basis of wrong and concocted facts. It was further alleged that no legal notice was served on the appellant.

(3.) On an application filed by the respondent under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC Trial Court, vide order dated 11th April, 2014, has passed a preliminary decree of possession in respect of the suit premises and has directed the appellant to hand over the possession of L-shape shop bearing no. H-16/95, Gali No. 2, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi 110005, front area from shutter measuring 9"x11".3" and on the back side measuring 17"9"+18".3"x37"x3" as shown in red colour in the site plan to the respondent within 60 days from the date of said order.