Back
1997 Supreme(Del) 690
High Court Of Delhi
S.DARSHAN SINGH KOHLI - Appellant
Versus
KUSUM ANAND - Respondent
Suit 28 of 1978
Decided On : 08/22/1997
A.K.MAHAJAN, KAMLESH MAHAJAN, RIMA KAIRA, S.C.SINGHA, V.K.Makhija, Vandana Khurana
Headnote:Civil Procedure Code 1908 - Suit — Recovery of possession — Mesne profit — Perpetual injunction — Plaintiff owner — Sought eviction — Defendant claimed as tenant — Relationship of landlord and tenant — Pleaded Under Section 50 of DRC Act jurisdiction barred — Plaintiff entitled to mesne profit @ Rs. 3000/- p.m. w.e.f. 1978 — Decree of possession granted.
Held:
The plaintiffs are granted decree of possession in respect of ground floor of the property bearing No. 1/5 West Patel Nagar, New Delhi with costs. The plaintiffs shall also be entitled to mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month from January 1, 1978 till the date the possession is handed over to them. The plaintiffs shall also make good the deficiency in Court-fees within two weeks from today and on payment of the requisite Court-fees the decree shall be drawn.
It is a matter of regret that civil litigation even in this Court is delayed to such a great extent that this suit has taken nearly two decades for disposal. The appropriate steps have to be taken in the very near future to plan expeditious disposal of matters so that faith in the judicial system of the country is not eroded. The suit was argued at length by one Senior counsel and when it was concluded another application was moved for framing of the additional issue in an effort to reopen the proceedings as well as there was a change of counsel. thereforee, an attempt was made to prolong the matter further. The defendant has been in possession of the suit property for nearly two decades and it is argued by learned counsel for the plaintiffs that she has built her own premises in the vicinity.
( 1 ) THE present suit is filed by the plaintiffs for recovery of possession and mesne profits and for issuance of perpetual injunction. The following reliefs are prayed: (a) Possession of the suit premises be delivered to the plaintiffs; (b) Perpetual injunction be issued against the defendant not to use the premises for any purposes other than for residence of the defendant and/or for members of her family and not to run any school over there; (c) Mesne profit @ Rs. 3,000. 00 per month w. e. f. January 1, 1978 be allowed until possession of the premises is restored back to the plaintiffs and interest @ 12% per annum be awarded thereon until recovery of the same.
( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs are owners of the property bearing No. 1/5, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi. This is a double storey house which the plaintiffs purchased from M/s Jawahar Mal and Sons some time in the year 1961. The land on which the said house was constructed was given on lease by the President of India to M/s Jawahar Mal and Sons vide lease deed dated January 24, 1961, registered as document No. 100 in supplementary book No. Volume 43, on pages 21-23 on January 27, 1961 subject to convenants and conditions therein contained on the part of the lessees or their successors to be observed and performed. The salient terms of the lease-deed are REFERRED TO to in sub paragraphs I and II of para 2 of the plaint and it will not be necessary to reproduce the same herein.
( 3 ) THE above said property was let out by the plaintiffs to National Cadet Corps (NCC) about 10 years prior to the filing of the present Suit and since the property could not be used for purposes other than residence, the Delhi Development Authority (for short DDA) objected to the non-residential user of the building. The D. D. A. the lodged complaint against the present plaintiffs under Section 29 (2) read with Section 14 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 some time in 1974 and the plaintiffs were eventually convicted on April 21, 1976 and were ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000. 00 each.
( 4 ) IN view of the aforesaid user of the premises the plaintiffs filed an application for eviction of their tenants the Union of India and others under Section 14 (1) (a) (c) (k) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 and one of the grounds of eviction was as follows: "that the respondent/tenants are, notwithstanding previous notice, using the suit premises in a manner contrary to the conditions imposed on the petitioners/landlords by the Ministry of Rehabilitation, Government of India, while giving them the lease of land on which the building containing suit premises is situated. The suit premises are also being used contrary to the purpose as laid down by the Master plan and the Zonal plan applicable to the area".
( 5 ) IT is further specified in the plaint that according to the Master plan/zonal plan, the building cannot be used for any purpose other than residence.
( 6 ) THE respondents in the above said eviction petition vacated the premises on August 31, 1977 realising that the property could not be put to a non-conforming use. The user of the building by the tenants was contrary to the terms of the lease on which the land underneath the building had been granted to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had appointed one D. K. Chadha as their attorney to conduct the aforesaid civil case of eviction against the Union of India and others. The defendant got in touch with D. K. Chadha and requested him to let the ground floor of the aforesaid building to her on a monthly rent of Rs. 3,000. 00 for the purpose of residence. She addressed the letter to the plaintiffs on October 28, 1977 in which he stated, inter alia: "i am interested to take the said premises on rental basis for residential purposes. The monthly rent as indicated by Mr. Mahajan is Rs. 3,000. 00 per month. " The defendant also asked for confirmation through the plaintiffs representative Shri D. K. Chadha. Th
