Delhi District Court
This Order Shall Dispose Of The ... vs . on 31 May, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. PRANJAL ANEJA
CIVIL JUDGE01, EAST, KKD COURTS, DELHI
Suit. No275/11
In the matter of:
Sonamati Kashyap
Vs.
Rita Devi
Order
1.This order shall dispose of the application u/o 39 rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC filed on behalf of the plaintiff on 22/12/11 praying that the defendants be restrained from selling, transferring or creating third party interest over the suit property and also to direct them to pay Rs. 1500/ per month to the plaintiff for unauthorized occupation of the suit premises till the final disposal of the main suit.
2. I have heard the parties and perused the file.
3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the present temporary injunction application u/o 39 rule 1 and 2 r/w section 151 CPC are that the plaintiff is the mother and Rita Suit No. 275/11 Page No.1/5 Devi, defendant is the daughter in law of the plaintiff. Initially the son of the plaintiff was also made party to the present suit as defendant no. 1 and later on he was examined u/o 1 rule 10 subsequent to which he was deleted from the array of parties also on the request of the plaintiff.
4. The plaintiff states herself to be the absolute owner and in possession of the built up property bearing no. S332, School Block, Shakar Pur Delhi92 measuring 175 sq yards and the said property was purchased from her own funds vide registered documents. The plaintiff has been paying all the municipal charges regularly. The defendants are residing in one room on the ground floor . As alleged the behavior of the defendant i.e. the daughter in law was not good from the beginning and she used to threat that she will live as per her own wish and will commit suicide and implicate the plaintiff. The plaintiff also lodged a complaint Suit No. 275/11 Page No.2/5 against her and asked her several times to make arrangement some where else. Plaintiff had also debarred the defendant and her son from all her properties and severed all her relations with them vide public notice in the newspaper. Plaintiff had also lodged another complaint dated 01/12/11 with PS Shakar pur. That the status of defendant in the suit property is unauthorized after 20/10/11 and the defendants are liable to pay Rs.1500/ to the plaintiff for unauthorized occupation.
5. As defendant no. 1 i.e. son of the plaintiff was examined u/o 1 rule 10 CPC and therefore was dropped as a party vide order dated 14/02/12, no WS was filed on his behalf. In WS filed by the defendant Smt. Rita Devi she has denied to the averments as made in the plaint and submits that her husband i.e. son of the plaintiff also contributed money in the construction of the suit property. The defendant has alleged that the plaintiff and her husband Suit No. 275/11 Page No.3/5 have been harassing her and have also demanded dowry.
6. A statement has been given on 12/04/12 by the counsel for the defendant on her behalf that she will not create third party interest or sell the suit property.Thus as the defendant has herself asserted and given a statement as mentioned above therefore she is restrained from selling / creating third party interest in the suit property till the disposal of the present suit.
7. Regarding the prayer seeking directions for the defendant to pay Rs. 1500/ per month to the plaintiff for unauthorized occupation of the suit premises till final disposal of the suit, it has not been shown by the plaintiff that on what basis the said amount has been claimed. It is not averred on behalf of the plaintiff that whether the defendant was allowed to live in the suit property as tenant or as licensee. In case the defendant is residing in the suit property as licensee, the plaintiff has not terminated her license. The relationship Suit No. 275/11 Page No.4/5 between defendant and her husband still subsist and in this circumstance , at this stage, the prayer of seeking Rs. 1500/ per month for unauthorized occupation cannot be allowed. The said prayer is in the form of mandatory injunction for which extra ordinary strong case has to be made out in order to seek the same at the interim stage.
8. In view of the above discussion, the present application u/o 39 rule 1 and 2 is partly allowed to the extent that the defendant Smt. Rita Devi is restrained from creating third party interest or selling the suit property till the final disposal of the present suit. Nothing in this order shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion on the final merits of the case.
Announced in the open court on (PRANJAL ANEJA) 31 day of May, 2012.
st CJ01, East/KKD.
Suit No. 275/11 Page No.5/5