( 1 ) THE plaintiff herein is the mother of the defendant no. 1. The defendant no. 2 is the wife and the defendants 3 and 4 are children of the defendant no. 1. This Suit is filed by the plaintiff for permanent and mandatory injunction and consequential relief under Section 6 of the Special Relief Act. It is the allegation of the plaintiff that she is the owner of the Suit premises namely, B-8, Anand Niketan, New Delhi (hereinafter REFERRED TO as Suit property, for short) which is a 2-1/2 storeyed house and that the defendant-1 have usurped and possessed the first floor of the Suit property. Prayer made in the Suit which is filed under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act as mentioned above, is for passing a decree of mandatory injunction, removing/evicting the defendants from the Suit premises and restoring the vacant possession thereof to the plaintiff. The decree for permanent injunction is also prayed for restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, employees, etc. from interfering with the possession of the property in the ground floor and second floor of the said house.

( 2 ) IA. 268/2001 is filed by the plaintiff seeking ad interim relief to the effect that the plaintiff be permitted to repair/rectify the leakage and water seepage coming from the bathroom of the first floor of the Suit premises with the assistance of labour forthwith and the defendants be restrained from creating any obstruction/hindrance from carrying out these repairs.

( 3 ) IA. 4970/2000 is an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter REFERRED TO as CPC, for short) praying as under:- a. That the defendants be directed to vacate the first floor premises the suit premises of the suit property - B-8, Anand Niketan, New Delhi, forthwith; b. Pass an ad interim exparte temporary injunction restrain the defendants their agents, servants, employees, assignees or their family members or anyone else acting on their behalf from entering and/or interfering with the peaceful use and possession of the plaintiff in the suit property - B-8, Anand Niketan, New Delhi; c. For constructing/alteration/renovation/ white washing/ the first floor of the B-8, anand Niketan, New Delhi. d. Restrain the defendants/agent/etc to part with possession to any third party. e. Pass such order/orders that this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

( 4 ) IA. 4971/2000 is an application under Order XLIll Rule 1 read with Section 151, CPC for appointment of Receiver. All these IAs were heard together and I propose to dispose them by this common Order.

( 5 ) BEFORE proceeding to deal with these applications, it would be appropriate to notice some more facts. As already mentioned above, the plaintiff claims herself to be the exclusive owner of the entire Suit premises and also. claims that the superstructure was erected thereon by her own funds. She states that for this purpose she had raised loans. She was working as Manager in United Bank of India. It is also alleged in the plaint that the defendants 1-4 were living separately from the plaintiff at 8740, Block-XI, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Apart from the defendants the plaintiff has two more children. One is the younger son who lives in munirka, New Delhi and is an officer in a Bank. The third child is her daughter who lives in u. S. A. The plaintiff frequently goes to U. S. A. and spends six months in a year with her daughter. When she comes bacx to India she stays at a flat in Gurgaon which belongs to her daughter. Incidentally the defendant no. 1 is also working in United Bank of India where the plaintiff served.

( 6 ) THE entire Suit premises were let out to Embassy of Zimbabwe since 1989 and the plaintiff was appropriating the entire rent as exclusive owner of the Suit property. The embassy ultimately vacated the Suit premises on 15/04/2000 but kept the possession till 17/04/2000. The plaintiff went to the S