Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

J.V. Farms (P) Ltd vs Department Of Environment & Forest on 1 March, 2014

      IN THE  COURT  OF SH. APOORV SARVARIA, CIVIL JUDGE­I, NEW 
                     DELHI  DISTRICT,  NEW DELHI

C.S. No: 145/13
Unique Case ID No. 02403C0084432013
J.V. Farms (P) Ltd.
Registered Office At:
5, Bhagwan Balmiki Mandir, Ring Road,
 Lajpat Nagar­II, New Delhi­110049.
Branch Office At:
Farm No. 7, Road No. Zero,
Silver Oak Marg, Ghitorni, New Delhi.
Through: Sh. Aakash Mangal
Director & Authorised Representative

                                                                                  ... Plaintiff

                                                                        Versus
      1.

Department of Environment & Forest Through: Secretary Government of NCT of Delhi, Delhi Secretariat A­Block, 2nd Floor, Vikas Bhawan, I.P.Estate, New Delhi­110002.

2. Department of Forests & Wildlife, Through: Secretary Government of NCT of Delhi, Delhi Secretariat A­Block, 2nd Floor, Vikas Bhawan, I.P.Estate, New Delhi­110002.

3. Forest Department (Ridge Division) Through: Deputy Conservator of Forest.

South Forest Division, Near Karni Singh Shooting Range, Tughlakabad, Delhi­110066.

...Defendants CS No. 145/13 M/s. J V Farms (P) Ltd. v. Department of Environment & Forest & Ors. Page 1 of 5 Date of Institution: 06.06.2013 Date of Reserving Order: 03.02.2014 Date of Order: 01.03.2014 ORDER ON APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC

1. By this order, the application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC filed by the plaintiff shall be disposed of.

2. In the application, the plaintiff is praying for an interim injunction that the defendants may be restrained from constructing the boundary wall and in any manner blocking the passage/rasta of 20 feet x 100 feet being used by plaintiff, comprised in Khasra No. 611, Village Ghitorni, New Delhi as shown in red colour in site plan A.

3. The brief facts are that the plaintiff J.V. Farms (P) Ltd. is a company and is the owner/recorded Bhumidar of land comprised of Khasra No. 608 (4­16), 609/2 (2­10) and 610 (1­17) situated in Revenue Estate of Village Ghitorni, Tehsil Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. It is stated that the plaintiff is user of right of way/passage/rasta of his land at Khasra No. 611 which is recorded in the name of Forest Department (Ridge Department) i.e. Defendants in the revenue records maintained by Revenue Authorities. It is stated that the land was purchased by the plaintiff vide registered sale deed dated 23.08.1996 with Sub­ Registrar, New Delhi from its previous Bhumidar. The plaintiff constructed boundary wall and installed a gate from where Kuccha passage starts connecting the said land of plaintiff with main municipal road which is known as Road No. Zero. It is stated that some time in October, 2012 it transpired to the plaintiff that the said kuccha rasta passes through Khasra No. 611 which was always a vacant plot. It is stated that the land was governed by the Delhi CS No. 145/13 M/s. J V Farms (P) Ltd. v. Department of Environment & Forest & Ors. Page 2 of 5 Land Reforms Act, 1968. It is stated that the defendant started constructing boundary walls around its land comprised of Khasra No. 611 and only then the plaintiff came to know that the said passage passes through the land of the defendants. The plaintiff requested the defendants not to close its gate as it will stop the entry and exit to the farm of the plaintiff. Being aggrieved by the construction of boundary wall in Khasra No. 611 by the defendants which is likely to be started at any moment, the plaintiff has filed the present suit claiming his right of user of way.

4. In the written statement and reply, the defendants have stated that the passage on which the plaintiff is claiming its right belongs to the Department of Forest and Wildlife, Government of NCT of Delhi. Reference has been made to a Notification dated 24.05.1994 wherein the Lieutenant Governer of Govt. of NCT of Delhi had declared the lands mentioned in Schedule A as reserved forest which includes the suit land and therefore, the plaintiff cannot lay any claim over the said land including the passage which is in issue in the present suit.

5. This court has heard Ld. Advocates for the plaintiff as well as for defendants and perused the record. Ld. Advocate for plaintiff has relied upon Ramkanya Bai v. Jagdish (2011) 7 SCC 452 to assert that civil court has jurisdiction to decide on the claim for easementary rights.

6. For claiming an interim relief in its favour, the plaintiff has to satisfy the following three ingredients:

a. the plaintiff should have a prima facie case in its favour and against the defendants.

b. the balance of convenience should lie in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants.

c. the plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss in case the interim relief is not granted to it.

7. In support of its case, the plaintiff has produced the sale deed dated CS No. 145/13 M/s. J V Farms (P) Ltd. v. Department of Environment & Forest & Ors. Page 3 of 5 23.08.1996, Aks Sharja showing the plaintiff's land as well as the land of Khasra No. 611 and the Khatouni Consolidation showing the plaintiff as the owner of Khasra No. 608. Even otherwise the defendants have not disputed the ownership of plaintiff in Khasra No. 608 situated in revenue estate of Village Ghitorni, Tehsil Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The plaintiff's plea has been that the passage going through Khasra No. 611 is the only route by which the plaintiff can enter its property at Khasra No. 608. From the site plan and the photographs produced by the plaintiff, it prima facie appears that the plaintiff has access to its property at Khasra No. 608 only through the passage going through Khasra No. 611 belonging to defendants.

8. The plaintiff has also challenged the notification of Khasra No. 611, Village Ghitorni, New Delhi vide Notification dated 24.05.1994 declaring it as reserved forest as the said land was previously in the name of Gram Sabha and as per defendant's own pleadings, the said land came at the disposal of the Forest Department vide Notification dated 02.04.1996. Therefore, the plaintiff has averred that there could not have been any notification U/s. 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 in 1994. Considering the fact that the plaintiff is challenging the process of notification of Khasra No. 611 as reserved forest which can be determined only after the evidence is lead and the fact that the passage in question is the only access point from the main road to the Khasra No. 608 belonging to the plaintiff, the plaintiff has a valid case to go for trial and has been able to make out a prima facie case.

9. The balance of convenience is also in favour of plaintiff as the boundary wall has yet not been constructed on the passage in question. The plaintiff will be suffering irreparable loss if interim relief is not granted. However, the width of 20 feet alleged to be claimed by the plaintiff appears to be excessive considering that the passage is passing through the land of Forest Department.

Thus, it is ordered that till the final disposal of suit, the defendants are restrained from contructing the boundary wall on the passage only to the extent of 10 feet from the boundary of Khasra no.610. The remaining 10 feet wide passage can be used by the defendants and boundary wall may also be constructed by the defendants including the remaining 10 feet wide passage. The application is disposed of in above terms. Nothing in this order shall be construed as opinion on merits of the case. Order be uploaded to www.delhidistrictcourts.nic.in.

Announced in the Open Court                                                                (Apoorv Sarvaria)
on 01st March, 2014                                                     Civil Judge­I, New Delhi District/New Delhi




CS No. 145/13
M/s. J V Farms (P) Ltd. v. Department of Environment & Forest & Ors.                                           Page 5 of 5