Delhi District Court
Malawati @ Heerawati vs Budhi Ram Jaiswal on 12 January, 2026
In the Court of Shri Ajay Kumar Malik : Judge Small
Causes Court, Additional Senior Civil Judge and Guardian
Judge of North East District at Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CS No. 10453/13
CNR No. DLNE03-001694-2013
In the matter of :-
Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati
W/o. Sh. Jai Shree Prasad Shukla
R/o. House no. 210, B-Block,
Gali no. 2, 2nd Pusta,
Sonia Vihar, Delhi-110094.
.....Plaintiff
VERSUS
Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal
S/o. Late Sh. Chola Jaiswal
R/o. House no. D-177, Gali no. 2,
2nd Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi-110094.
.....Defendant
Suit for Permanent and Mandatory Injunction
Date of institution : 15.02.2013
Reserved for Judgment : 24.12.2025
Date of decision : 12.01.2026
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 1 of 15
AJAY Digitally signed
by AJAY KUMAR
KUMAR MALIK
Date: 2026.01.12
MALIK 16:54:36 +0530
JUDGMENT
1. This is a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction filed by plaintiff against the defendant thereby seeking following decrees:-
a. A decree for permanent injunction in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant thereby restraining the defendant, his associates, agents, attorney, relatives, friends and legal heirs from creating third party interest and the defendant not to object to the plaintiff, the plaintiff may allowed to construct the abovesaid property/plot measuring area 50 sq. yds., out of Khasra No. 219, Sadat Pur Gurjan Abadi of B-1, B-Block, Gali no. 3, 2 nd Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi-110094 which is shown red in the site plan.
b. A decree of mandatory injunction thereby directing the defendant to remove the lock, if any gate is locked by the defendant from inside of the suit property/plot measuring area 50 sq. yds. out of Khasra No. 219, Sadat Pur, Gurjan Abadi of B-1, B Block, Gali no. 3, 2nd Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi-110094 Plaintiff's Case
2. The case of the plaintiff as averred in the plaint is that the plaintiff is the registered owner of property measing 50 sq yds. Out of Khasra No. 219, Sadat Pur Gurjan Abadi of B-1, B-Block, Gali no. 3, 2nd Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi-110094 (hereinafter CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 2 of 15 Digitally signed AJAY by AJAY KUMAR MALIK KUMAR Date:
MALIK 2026.01.12
16:54:45 +0530
called as suit property) vide registered GPA dated 06.02.2006 with the Sub-Registrar-IV, Seelampur, Delhi executed by Sh. Rama Shanker Tiwari. It is further stated that the defendant is also having a plot adjacent with the plot of plaintiff in the same gali and same khasra number (shown in blue colour in the site plan). It is further stated that in the month of April, 2011 the defendant alongwith 3-4 persons entered the plot of the plaintiff and tried to demolish the boundary wall and that time son of the plaintiff reached at the suit property, the defendant and his associates ran away from the suit property. It is further stated that on 01.02.2013 at about 1:00 PM., the plaintiff came to know that the defendant entered the suit property from his house which is adjacent to the suit property and started construction over their suit property, in the mean time, son of the plaintiff called to the police and police came at the suit property, thereafter, the defendant stopped construction work. It is further stated that on 02.02.2013 again the defendant alongwith 2-3 persons entered the suit property, in the mean time, the son of the plaintiff again called to the police and on the intervention of the police, the construction work was stopped but the defendant threatened the plaintiff that he will definitely start the construction over their suit property very soon. It is further stated that on 09.02.2013 the defendant further started construction over the suit property and on the same time son of the plaintiff again called police and thereafter the construction work was stopped. It is futher stated that the plaintiff came to know that the gate of the above said suit property has been locked by the defendant from inside of the suit CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 3 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:54:53 +0530 property, which is illegal and unauthorized. It is further stated that the defendant has already filed false suit on the basis of forged documents against the son of the plaintiff and others which are pending before the court of Sh. Rajkumar, Ld. ASCJ/JSCC, Karkardooma Court, Delhi. It is further stated that the plaintiff has no efficacious remedy except to file the present suit.
Defendant's Case
3. Written statement has been filed on behalf of defendant wherein it has been contended that the plaintiff is neither in the possession of the suit property nor the owner of the suit property. The plaintiff is having the photocopy of the GPA, Agreement to Sell, Will, Receipt, but the said property does not exist in this khasra number. It is further stated that as per the site plan filed by the plaintiff, the portion in which the plaintiff claims his title does not exist because the back portion of the property of the defendant is a 100 sq. yds. built up property, which belongs to the defendant. The defendant is the owner of the property measuring area 100 sq. yds. (45 fts. X 20 fts.) in khasra no. 219, situated in the village of Sadatpur Gurjan in the abadi of B-Block, Gali no. 3, Second Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi by virtue of General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell, Possession Letter and Receipt of full and final payment and Will all dated 19.11.2007 executed by defendant with Smt. Kuntesh, w/o Sh. Mange Ram Tyagi, r/o B- 528, Gali no. 6, Second Pusta, Sonia Vihar, Delhi and the CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 4 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:00 +0530 defendant is having the complete chain of the documents of the property, which is shown in the site plan filed by the plaintiff and the correct site plan of the suit property is filed by the defendant. It is further stated that the plaintiff never resided at the address mentioned in the plaint nor concern the property in khasra no. 219, nor filed any document in respect to the same.
Issues
4. After completion of pleadings, vide order dated 18.08.2017, the following issues were framed by learned Predecessor of this court:
i Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP. ii Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP. iii Relief.
Plaintiff's Evidence
5. a Sh. Vinay Kumar Shukla was examined as PW-1, who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. PW-1/A has stated and reiterated on oath the contents of his affidavit. He has relied upon the following documents:-
i. Ex.PW1/1 is original SPA dated 18.02.2017. ii. Ex.PW1/2 (colly) is the photocopy of GPA, Agreement to Sell, Will Deed and Receipt.
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 5 of 15 Digitally signed AJAY by AJAY KUMAR MALIK KUMAR Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:12 +0530 iii. Ex.PW1/3 is site plan. iv. Mark-A is four photographs of the suit property. b. Sh. Anurag Dwivedi, Ahlmad in the Court of Ms. Colette
Rashmi Kujur, Ld. JSCC/ASCJ.G.Judge (N/E) was a summoned witness and got examined as PW-2, he brought the summoned record i.e the case file bearing CS No. 104222/15, titled as Budhi Ram Jaiswal vs. Vipin Kumar Shukla containing the originals of documents already Ex.PW1/2 (colly).
c. Sh. Ashok Kumar was examined as PW-2, who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. PW-2/A has stated and reiterated on oath the contents of the affidavit.
d. Smt. Kuntesh was examined as PW-3, who in her affidavit in evidence Ex.PW3/A, has stated and reiterated oath the contents of the affidavit.
e. Sh. Gopal Dutt, Record Keeper, Office of Sub-registrar IV, Seelampur Delhi was a summoned witness and got examined as PW-4. He brought the summoned record i.e. Original Irrevocable GPA having registered no. 1796, Additional Book No. 4, Volume No. 10124 pages 137 to 140 dated 06.02.2006, the copies of the same are Ex.PW4/1 (colly) (OSR).
6. Plaintiff's evidence was closed on 11.05.2022 and the matter was adjourned for defendant's evidence.
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 6 of 15 Digitally signed AJAY by AJAY KUMAR MALIK KUMAR Date:
2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:19 +0530 Defendant's Evidence
7. (a) Defendant Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal got examined himself as DW1, who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. DW-1/A has stated and reiterated on oath the contents of his written statement. He has relied upon the following documents:-
i. Ex.DW1/1 is certified copy of original site plan with respect to plot measuring 100 sq. yds. ii. Ex.DW1/2 (OSR) is copy of General Power of Attorney dated 19.11.2007 with respect to plot measuring 100 sq yds.
iii. Ex.DW1/3 (OSR) is copy of Agreement to Sell dated 19.11.2007 with respect to plot measuring 100 sq yds.
iv. Ex.DW1/4 (OSR) is copy of possession letter dated
19.11.2007 with respect to plot measuring 100 sq, yds.
v. Ex.DW1/5 (OSR) is copy of Receipt of full and final payment dated 19.11.2007 with respect to plot measuring 100 sq. yds.
vi. Ex.DW1/6 (OSR) is copy of Will dated 19.11.2007 with respect to plot measuring 100 sq. yds. vii. Ex.DW1/7 is certified copy of original site plan with respect to plot measuring 50 sq yds.
viii. Ex.DW1/8 is certified copy of plaint with supporting affidavit of suit beaing no. 157/2011 with respect to plot measuring 50 sq. yds.
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 7 of 15 Digitally signed AJAY by AJAY KUMAR MALIK KUMAR Date:
MALIK 2026.01.12
16:55:28 +0530
ix. Ex.DW1/17 is certified copy of written statement
filed by the attorney of the plaintiff in Civil Suit bearing no. 157/2011.
x. Ex.DW1/9 is certified copy of written statement filed by MCD in Civil Suit no. 157/2011. xi. Ex.DW1/10 is certified copy of complaint dated 23.04.2011.
xii. Ex.DW1/11 is certified copy of FAX receipt dated 23.04.2011.
xiii. Ex.DW1/12 (colly) is certified copy of courier receipt dated 23.04.2011.
xiv. Ex.DW1/13 certified copy of complaint dated 25.04.2011.
xv. Ex.DW1/14 is certified copy of FAX receipt dated 25.04.2011.
xvi. Ex.DW1/15 is certified copy of photographs. xvii. Ex.DW1/16 is certified copy of the plaint with supporting affidavit of suit no. 66/2011. xviii. Ex.DW1/18 is certified copy of written statement with affidavit of attorney of the plaintiff in suit no. 66/2011.
xix. Ex.DW1/19 is certified copy of the written statement with affidavit of defendant no. 2 and 3. xx. Ex.DW1/20 is certified copy of the written statement with affidavit of defendant no. 4 and 5 in suit no. 66/2011.
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 8 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:35 +0530 xxi. Ex.DW1/21 is certified copy of the replication filed by the plaintiff in suit no. 66/2011.
xxii. Ex.DW1/22 is certified copy of report filed by the PG Cell of office of DCP North-East.
xxiii. Ex.DW1/23 is certified copy of orders passed by Special Executive Magistrate, North-East District, Seelampur in kalandara u/s 107/150 Cr.PC. xxiv. Ex.DW1/24 is certified copy of Kalandara u/s 107/150 Cr.PC dated 28.04.2011 in case titled State Vs. Budhi Ram and Anr.
xxv. Ex.DW1/25 is certified copy of Kalandara u/s 107/150 Cr.PC dated 28.04.2011in case titled State Vs. Vinay Shukla and Anr.
xxvi. Ex.DW1/26 is certified copy of DD No. 35-B dated 22.04.2011.
xxvii. Ex.DW1/27 is certified copy of statement of Vinay Shukla.
xxviii. Ex.DW1/28 is certified copy of statement of Arun Kumar Sharma.
xxix. Ex.DW1/29 is certified copy of statement of Mange Ram Tyagi.
xxx. Ex.DW1/30 is certified copy of statement of Rakesh Gupta.
xxxi. Ex.DW1/31 is certified copy of statement of Malawati @ Heerawati.
xxxii. Ex.DW1/32 is certified copy of statement of Ashok Kumar.
CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 9 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:43 +0530 xxxiii. Ex.DW1/33 is certified copy of Rojnamcha. xxxiv. Ex.DW1/34 is certified copy of SI Mintu Singh. xxxv. Ex.DW1/35 is certified copy of Dak Register.
(b) Sh. Sujeet Jaiswal was examined as DW2, who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. DW-2/A has stated and reiterated on oath the contents of his affidavit.
(c) Sh. Dinesh was examined as DW3, who in his affidavit in evidence Ex.DW-3/A has stated and reiterated on oath the contents of his affidavit.
(d) Sh. Amit Kumar was a summoned witness and got examined as DW3, he brought the summoned record i.e. the complete file of CT No. 48690/2015 titled as Budhi Ram Jaiswal vs. Vipin Kumar Shukla @ Vinay Kumar Shukla and ors. The copy of action taken report alongwith enquiry conducted by SI Deepak is Ex.DW3/1, site plan is Ex.DW3/2 and RTI application to SDM Seelampur alongwith reply is Ex.DW3/3.
(e) HC Vikrant Singh was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-4, he brought the record i.e. copy of letter no. 28644-28743/HAR/NED dated 11.12.2023 which is Ex.DW4/1 (colly 6 pages).
(f) W/Ct. Anuradha was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-5, she brought the summoned record i.e. copy CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 10 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:55:51 +0530 of order no. 4269-4330/Compt-VI/NE Distt, dated 05.05.2015 issued by ACP/HQ for Dy. Commissioner of Police, North East District, Delhi, as per above the orders the summoned record has already been weeded out, the copy of order is Ex.DW5/1 (OSR).
(g) HC Arun Kumar was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-6, he brought the copy of order no. 25274- 25375/HAR/NED dated 18.10.2017 issued by ACP/HQ for Dy. Commissoner of Police, North East District, Delhi, as per the above orders the summoned record has already been weeded out, the copy of order is Ex.DW6/1 (OSR) (colly).
(h) SI Dalip Kumar Sharma was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-7, he brought the original complaint diary register in which the complaint dated 06.04.2011 and 25.04.2011 were receipt in the office of Commissioner of Police through courier vide diary no. 11 dated 07.04.2011 and diary no. 43 dated 25.04.2011 respectively, the copy of the said diary number is Ex.DW7/1 (colly) and after that the same were sent to PA to CP for further necessary action, after that the said record has been destroyed vide order no. 559-640/CP Sectt. Dated New Delhi 09.02.2024, the same is Ex.DW7/2.
(i) Sh. Vivek Chaudhary, JJA, Record Room, North-East was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-8, he brought the original record of documents already exhibited as Ex.DW1/8, CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 11 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:56:02 +0530 Ex.DW1/17, Ex.DW1/09, Ex.DW1/16, Ex.DW1/18, Ex.DW1/19, Ex.DW1/20, Ex.DW1/21, Ex.DW1/1, Ex.DW1/23,Ex.DW1/24, Ex.DW1/25, Ex.DW1/26, Ex.DW1/27, Ex.DW1/28, Ex.DW1/29, Ex.DW1/30, Ex.DW1/31, Ex.DW1/32, Ex.DW1/33, Ex.DW1/34, Ex.DW1/35, Ex.DW1/10, Ex.DW1/11, Ex.DW1/12, Ex.DW1/13, Ex.DW1/14 and Ex.DW1/15 and he also brought copy of site plan filed by defendant in respect of plot 100 sq., the copy of same is Ex.DW8/1 and amended WS filed by defendant no. 1 i.e. Vipin Kumar Shukla, the copy of same is Ex.DW8/2.
(j) Sh. Saurabh Jain, JE Building, SNZ, Shahadara, Delhi was a summoned witness and got examined as DW-9, he stated that the complaint with the name of complainant as Buddhi Ram Jaiswal was received in the office of DC which find mention its entry at Entry no. 326 dated 07.04.2011 which was finally got marked to AE(M) IV, (Ward no. 272) on 15.04.2011, the copy of complaint receiving register is Ex.DW9/1 (OSR).
8. Defendant's evidence was closed on 13.10.2025. Thereafter the matter was listed for final arguments.
9. Final arguments have been heard. I have gone through judicial record, now I shall give my issue-wise findings on the following issues :-
Issue wise findings Issue no. 1 CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 12 of 15 Digitally signed AJAY by AJAY KUMAR MALIK KUMAR Date:
MALIK 2026.01.12
16:56:10 +0530
i Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP.
The onus to prove issue no. (i) was upon plaintiff. In order to discharge her onus the plaintiff got examined 4 witnesses in total out of which plaintiff got examined Sh. Vinay Kumar Shukla as PW-1. By way of present suit the plaintiff has not sought any relief of declaration to declare her as owner and in possession of the suit property or any sought of declaration qua her documents, so Court will confine its pleading to extent of prayer clause only. PW-1 proved the SPA dated 18.02.2017 as Ex.PW1/1 and site plan of property as Ex.PW1/3. During entire course of evidence the plaintiff not brought on record any sanctioned construction plan approved by MCD or any other government authority so as to issue injunction in her favour and against the defendant to allow the plaintiff to raise construction at the suit property. The plaintiff also summoned the record i.e. the document in favour of Malawati in CS No. 104222/15 titled as Buddhi Ram Jaiswal Vs. Vipin Kumar Shukla. These documents Ex.PW1/2 contains the GPA but very surprisingly the GPA dated 31.01.2006 was stamped by the office of Sub- Registrar on 06.02.2005 but Court made the observations on that GPA that all the stamping on the registered GPA are dated 06.02.2006 except on the last page by the Sub-Registrar. Plaintiff himself is not clear that what is the actual status of suit property regarding actual physical possession of it. In the prayer clause of plaint itself the plaintiff has sought injunction against the CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 13 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:56:18 +0530 defendant to remove the lock, if any locked the gate by the defendant from inside the suit property. The plaintiff herself is not clear regarding the possession of the suit property and is also not having any santioned constuction plan approved by MCD.
The plaintiff is seeking the injunction including the permission from the Court to construct the plot/suit property measuring 50 sq. yds.. It is settled law that it is within domain of MCD only whether to grant or to reject any permission or to grant sanction for construction over suit property but it is not the Court domain to grant permission to any person to raise construction in that plot, so, being out of domain the Court cannot grant any permission to the plaintiff to raise the construction at plot and the plaintiff has also failed to bring any sanctioned construction plan approved by MCD to raise construction at suit property, hence, the plaintiff has failed to discharge her onus to prove issue no.
(i), hence, the issue no. (i) is decided against the plaintiff.
Issue no. 2 ii Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP.
The onus to prove issue no. (ii) was upon plaintiff. In order to discharge her onus the plaintiff got examined 4 witnesses in total. The plain reading of prayer for mandatory injunction itself suggests that the defendant has sought the injunction against defendant thereby directing the defendant to remove the lock, if any locked the gate by the defnedant from inside the suit CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 14 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:56:28 +0530 property. The plaintiff is herself not clear that whether she is seeking any relief of possession or not. The plaintiff has preferred the plain suit for injunction but not the suit for possession. The plaintiff has not asserted the possession of defendant over suit property the plaintiff has claimed herself to be the owner and in possession of the suit property but not averred a single instance that the defendant has taken the possession of suit property from her so as to entitle the plaintiff for allowing the possession of suit property by way of handing over or removing the locks from suit property as sought in form of mandatory injunction. The plaintiff again failed to discharge her onus to prove issue no. (ii). Accordingly the issue no. (ii) is decided against the plaintiff.
Relief iii Relief.
In view of the findings arrived at while deciding issue no.
(i) and (ii), the suit of plaintiff is dismissed.
Decree sheet be prepared.
File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. Announced in the Open Court on 12.01.2026 SH. AJAY KUMAR MALIK JSCC/ASCJ/G. Judge(N/E) Karkardooma Courts, Delhi CS No. 10453/13 Smt. Malawati @ Heerawati vs. Sh. Budhi Ram Jaiswal Page no. 15 of 15 AJAY Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR KUMAR MALIK Date: 2026.01.12 MALIK 16:56:36 +0530