Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

soon in that regard.

(xii). The defendants have now also threatened the plaintiff to make unauthorized and illegal structural changes, additions, alternations and new constructions in the said premises, without the written consent, knowledge and permission of the plaintiff. The threatened action of the defendant in this respect is illegal, malafide, unwarranted by law and against the provisions of the principles of natural justice. The defendants have no right to take the law in their own hands.

3. Recovery of arrears of damages (difference) for C.S. 46/2011 R. P. Aggarwal Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. C.S. 51/2012 V. K. Saxena Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

the period from 01.10.2005 to 30.03.2006.

4. Recovery of future damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the premises till the possession is handed over to the plaintiff.

5. Relief of Injunction thereby restraining the defendants from making any additions, alternations or any structural changes in the premises.

vi) The plaintiffs have wrongly stated and claimed that they are entitled to recovery of future damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the suit premises till the possession is handed over to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has wrongly stated and C.S. 46/2011 R. P. Aggarwal Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. C.S. 51/2012 V. K. Saxena Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

claimed in the plant that he is entitled to the relief of injunction thereby restraining the defendants from making any addition, alternations or structural changes in the premises. These are not maintainable under the law.