An order of status quo cannot be enforced against a person who was not served with the order and had no knowledge of it.

( 1 ) THIS is plaintiff s application under Order 39 Rules I and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "c. P. C. ") seeking directing against the defendants for demolition of the portion, alleged to have been constructed after the passing of the order of status quo.

( 2 ) ON 26th August, 1993, the plaintiff filed suit seeking injunction against Rakesh Jindal, defendant No. 1 not to construct the first and second floor of the rear portions of premises House No. W-106, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi without mutation or probate and without proper sanction of site plan and except with due process of law. Plaintiff also prayed injunction against defendant No. 1 not to break/damage the stair case. No relief was claimed against the second defendant, namely, Vinay Kumar Jindal. Other two defendants impleaded in the suit are, Commissioner, and Zonal Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

( 3 ) IT was alleged that plot bearing No. W-10 was purchased by Om Prakash Gupta, plaintiff s uncle from D. L. F, Housing and Construction Pvt. Ltd. , who died in the year 1985. Before his death, Om Prakash Gupta had got a building plan sanctioned from Municipal Corporation of Delhi and also built up a single storey house in the year 1963-64. It was also alleged that Om Prakash Gupta was married to one Smt. Shakuntla Devi but the said property had devolved upon the three nephews of Om Prakash Gupta, namely, plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 on the basis of a will, alleged to have been executed by 0m Prakash Gupta on 30th September, 1981. As per the Will, Shakuntia Devi has a right to reside in the house without any title in the property. Shakuntia Devi was not impleaded initially as party. Along with the suit the plaintiff filed an application (IA. 7593/93) for temporary injunction restraining defendant No. 1 not to carry on construction activity without,proper sanctioned plan.

( 4 ) ON 30th August, 1993, while issuing notice on the application. Court directed status quo to be maintained in order to ascertain the state of construction a local Commissinoner was also appointed on the same day.

( 5 ) ON 18th May, 1994, the plaintiff moved an application (I. A. 4792/94) under Order 1 Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code. for impleading Smt. Shakuntia Devi as defendant No. 5 in the suit. He also sought directions against her not to raise any additional construction in the property. On 20th May, 1994, notice of this application was directed to be issued to Smt. Shakuntia Devi for 20th September, 1994. It was also directed that status quo order regarding construction of the suit property shall continue to operate. On 4th July, 1994,when the case was taken up again notice was again directed to be issued to Smt. Shakuntia Devi for 24th August, 1994 and in view of the order passed on 20th May, 1994, it was directed that Shakuntia Devi shall also stand restrained from raising any construction in the suit property until further orders. It is not in dispute that Shakuntia Devi was added as a party by virtue of the order passed on 13th September, 1994. In the aforementioned background, plaintiff has moved this application alleging that after the passing of the two orders of status quo aforementioned, namely, on 30th August, 1993 and 20th May, 1994, defendants 1 and 2, in collusion with Shakuntia Devi on 1st July, 1994 carried out considerable construction in addition to the construction which had been carried out prior to institution of the suit from 18th August, 1993 onwards. In the application it is alleged that the construction carried out from 1st July, 1994 onwards, being in contravention of the Court s order is liable to be demolished and defendants are liable to be punished in accordance with law.

( 6 ) DEFENDANT No. 2 filed his reply and stated that he had or has nothing to do with the construction, if any, carried out in the disputed property. He also pointed out that no relief has been claimed against him in the su