JUDGMENT

SHARMA, J.:—Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Special leave is granted.

2. The respondents in this appeal have successfully invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court under Art. 226 of Constitution for enforcement of a private right to immoveable property against the appellants who are two brothers and who are resisting the claim. The question is as to whether the writ jurisdiction in the High Court is available for the enforcement of such a right claimed by and against private individual.

3. The dispute relates to a house-property in Delhi. A suit for eviction of the appellants from the building is pending in the trial Court. According to the case of the respondent No. 1, who is the owner of the property, she had let out the same to one Shri B. K. Pandey who later illegally handed over the possession thereof to the appellant No. 1. According to the further case of the respondent, the portion of the said house property which is the subject matter of the present case is beyond the purview of the pending suit. The occasion for initiating the present proceeding with respect to this portion arose, it is said, on account of the high-handedness of the appellants who illeg