ANU MALHOTRA, J.

1. The appellant vide the present Regular Second Appeal i.e. RSA 7/2017 assails the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2016 of the Court of the learned ADJ-09 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in RCA No.61126/16 (Old RCA No.54/15) which dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants herein against the impugned judgment and decree dated 19.10.2011 of the learned Trial Court of the Civil Judge, North (IV), Tis Hazari Courts in Suit No.1235/06 vide Case ID No.C0829602006 vide which the suit filed by the respondent no.1 herein against the predecessor in interest of the appellant nos. 1 & 2 Smt. Pushpa and against Sh. Surender Kumar Jain arrayed as respondent no.2 to the present petition and who was arrayed as defendant no.2 to the said suit, was decreed in favour of Smt. Mamta Kukreja i.e. the respondent no.1 herein. The said suit filed by Smt. Mamta Kukreja i.e. the respondent no.1 herein and the plaintiff of the said suit was a suit for possession and mesne profits in relation to the suit property bearing no.MU-35D, 3rd Floor, Pitam Pura, Delhi against the predecessor in interest of the appellant nos. 1 & 2 herein and the defendant no.2 i.e. the respondent no.2 herein.

2. Vide the decree dated 19.10.2011, the predecessor in interest of the appellants was directed to hand over the physical possession of the suit property mentioned hereinabove to Smt. Mamta Kukreja within a period of six months from the date of the decision of the suit and was also held entitled to recover the mesne profits/damages at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per month from the defendant no.1 i.e. Smt. Pushpa, the predecessor in interest of the appellants from the date of the institution of the suit which was instituted on 13.09.2006 till the date of delivery of possession of the suit property to the plaintiff thereof i.e. Smt. Mamta Kukreja, respondent no.1 herein to the present appeal.

3. The facts qua the suit set forth in the judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 19.10.2011 read to the effect:-

“2. The brief facts of the case are as follows : -

The plaintiff is the owner of DDA LIG Flat no. MU-35D, Pitam Pura, Delhi (third floor) having been purchased the same from defendant no.2. It is stated that the said suit property was originally alloted to defendant no.1 by the DDA. Defendant no. 1 thereafter sold the said suit property to defendant no. 2 for her personal needs after receiving the entire sale consideration and defendant no. 1 executed necessary sale documents in favour of defendant no.2. Further it is stated that since defendant no.1 had very close relations with defendant no. 2 therefore defendant no.2 allowed defendant no. 1 to remain in possession of the said suit property till defendant no.1 could arrange an alternative accommodation for herself. Defendant no. 2 further sold the suit property to the plaintiff and after receiving the sale consideration defendant no. 2 executed the sale documents i.e agreement to sell, GPA etc. dated 08/08/02 in favour of plaintiff. It is stated that defendant no.1 remained in physical possession to the suit property as defendant no. 2 had assured that defendant no.1 shall vacate the suit property within 6 months after defendant no.1 could arrange-alternative accommodation for herself. Plaintiff, however, got the suit property converted into free hold from the DDA by depositing necessary charges. It is alleged that plaintiff had requested defendant no. 1 on several occasions to vacate the suit property, however, defendant no. 1 failed to vacate the same. Thereafter plaintiff served a legal notice dated 21/07/06 on defendant no. 1 thereby revoking the licence of defendant no.1 and to deliver the vacant possession of the suit property till 31/08/06 and further called upon defendant no.1 to pay damages for illegal use and occupation of the suit property after 01/09/2006 @ Rs. 7000/- per month. However, defendant no. 1 did not vacate the suit property, therefore, the plaintiff has filed the present su