Delhi District Court
Rohini Courts:Delhi vs Shri Brij Bhushan & Others on 7 October, 2011
1
IN THE COURT OF MS. SMITA GARG: JSCC/ASCJ(NW)
ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
S1044/09
In re:
Shri Vishwendra Verma .... Plaintiff
Versus
Shri Brij Bhushan & Others .... Defendants
ORDER:
1. By this order, I shall decide an application dated 03.12.2010 filed on behalf of the defendants No. 1 to 4 seeking release of the keys of the shop No. 15, LSC, Pocket B, Ashok Vihar, Phase III, Delhi ( herein after referred to as "suit shop") deposited in Court by the plaintiff on 29.09.2010.
2. Brief background, which led to the above application is that the plaintiff filed the present interpleader suit on 17.10.2009 averring that he was inducted as tenant in respect to the suit shop by the defendants No. 1 to 4 vide registered lease deed dated 07.03.2005; that the suit shop had been mortgaged with UCO Bank by the defendants No. 1 to 4 and since they failed to settle the loan amount, suit shop was sold by the bank in public auction on 10.02.2006 to the defendant NO. 5; that in view of clause 'L' of the lease deed dated 07.03.2005, the defendant NO. 5 started collecting rent of the suit shop from the plaintiff w.e.f. Feb' 2006; that since the plaintiff wanted to vacate the suit shop in the month of August' 2009 and the defendants No. 1 to 4 and defendant No. 5 were claiming possession, he was constrained to file the suit seeking declaration of entitlement of the defendants to take 2 vacant & peaceful possession of the suit shop. Upon being served, the defendants NO. 1 to 4 appeared and filed their written statement. On 29.09.2010, the keys of the suit shop were placed on record by the plaintiff where upon the application on hand was preferred by the defendants No. 1 to 4. Notice of the application as well as summons of the suit were sent to the defendant No. 5 but despite being served, he failed to appear and was proceeded exparte.
3. A perusal of the record shows that along with their written statement, the defendants No. 1 to 4 have filed the certified copy of order dated 24.06.2008 passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal III in O.S No. 109 of 2006 titled as "UCO bank Vs. Ankit Pharma" and S.A No. 06 of 2006 titled as "Brij Bhushan Chhabra Vs. UCO Bank" vide which the sale of suit shop to the defendant NO. 5 by the bank in auction conducted on 16.02.2006 was set aside and it was ordered that if the defendants No. 1 to 4 herein would deposit the loan amount on or before 31.12.2008 with the bank, the bank shall issue a "No dues certificate" to them and shall also release the original title deed relating to the mortgaged property to them. Subsequently, the defendants No. 1 to 4 also placed on record the copy of order dated 01.07.2010 passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi whereby the appeal preferred by the UCO Bank against the order dated 24.06.2008 was dismissed and the bank was directed to pay back the money to the auction purchaser i.e the defendant No. 5 herein within one month. Here, it is note worthy that the notice of the above mentioned appeal was sent to the 3 defendant No. 5 as well but he did not appear before the Appellate Tribunal. Apart from the above documents, the defendants No. 1 to 4 have also produced on record the copy of "No dues certificate" issued by UCO Bank on 12.07.2010, copy of order dated 27.10.2010 passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in appeal No. 133/08 recording the handing over of the original title deeds of suit shop by the bank to the defendants No. 1 to 4 as well as the Award dated 12.10.2010 passed by Ld. Arbitrator allowing the claim of the defendants No. 1 to 4 for recovery of possession of suit shop, arrears of rent and damages against the plaintiff herein. Keeping in view the above documents, prima facie the defendants No. 1 to 4 are the owner of the suit shop and are thus entitled to the release of the keys thereof. Accordingly, it is directed that the keys of the suit shop be released to the defendants No. 1 to 4 or their counsel against acknowledgment subject to furnishing of undertakings by defendants No. 1 to 4 to the effect that if upon the conclusion of trial, the defendant No. 5 is held to be entitled to the possession of the suit shop, they shall compensate him for the use and occupation of the suit shop in the sum as determined by the court.
4. The application dated 03.12.2010 filed on behalf of defendants No. 1 to 4 stands disposed of with the above directions.
Announced in the open court ( Smita Garg )
on 07.10.2011 JSCC/ASCJ(NW)
4
S1044/09
07.10.2011
Pr. None for the plaintiff.
Deft. no4 in person on behalf of the deft. no1 to 3 as well.
Defendant no5 exparte.
Vide separate order, the application dated 03.12.2010 filed on behalf of defendants No. 1 to 4 has been allowed.
Put up for arguments on the application U/o 7 R 11 CPC as well as U/s 340 CrPC preferred on behalf of the defendant no1 to 4 on 25.11.2011.
JSCC/ASCJ(NW) Delhi:07.10.11