JUDGMENT :

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

1. This judgment has been pronounced through video conferencing.

C.M. APPL. No. 14329/2020

2. This is an application seeking exemption from filing court fee and duly attested affidavits. Binding the deponent of the affidavit to the contents of the application, the exemption is granted. Insofar as the court fee is concerned, the same be deposited within four weeks. Application is disposed of. Registry to submit a report in case the court fees is not filed after a month.

C.M. APPL. No. 241/2020

3. This application has been filed by the Petitioner for referring the Khasra Girdawari for the year 1983-88, which is in Urdu, for translation to the translation branch of the Delhi High Court or for the true translated copy filed by the Petitioner to be treated as the correct true translated copy of the girdawari. The translation of the Khasra Girdawari filed by the Petitioner is taken on record. Application is disposed of.

C.M. (M) No. 416/2019 and C.M. APPL. No. 11534/2019 (for stay)

Brief Background

4. The present petition arises out of a suit for permanent injunction filed by the Petitioner/Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) - Mr. Bal Bhagwan against the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter “DDA”) seeking permanent injunction restraining the DDA from demolishing or forcibly dispossessing the Plaintiff from three temple premises namely Mandir Kali Mai, Mandir Bada Beer Dham and Mandir Shivji Maharaj situated on private land bearing Khasra No. 1075/803/50 measuring 4 bigha 3 biswas and a temple premises of Sankat Mochan Bajrang Bali on land measuring 2 bigha 11 biswas in Khasra No. 1074/803/50 of village Khampura Raya, Delhi bearing MCD No. 2151/18, Swami Onkara Nand Ashram, New Patel Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter “suit property”).

5. The Plaintiff had moved an application for interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC before the Civil Judge. Vide order dated 10th December, 2018, the Ld. Civil Court dismissed the application for injunction. Thereafter, the Plaintiff preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed vide the impugned order dated 27th February, 2019. This Court, at the time of admission of the present petition, on 12th March, 2019, issued notice and directed that no coercive steps be taken by the DDA against the Plaintiff.

6. The case of the Plaintiff has been captured in brief in the plaint. The Plaintiff claims that he is the Chela of Late Swami Onkara Nand who was managing/running four temples situated on the suit property. The temples were located on two separate khasras, with three temples being located on Khasra No. 1075/803/50 and one temple being located on Khasra No. 1074/803/50. It is claimed that the said four temples are in the possession of the Plaintiff as they are managed by him and they have been running at least since the 1960.

7. Swami Onkara Nand expired on 10th May, 1982 and by way of a registered Will dated 13th April, 1982, the Plaintiff was made the manager of the entire temple complex. It is claimed that the DDA attempted to take forcible possession of the suit property and dispossess the Plaintiff, leading to the filing of the suit for permanent injunction. The DDA filed its written statement and claimed that the entire land is government land and that the Plaintiff is in illegal occupation of the same. It took the stand that the Plaintiff, who has no rights in the suit property, cannot prevent the DDA from taking over the land which is meant for rehabilitation of the Kathputli Colony dwellers and had been vested in the DDA by the Ministry of Rehabilitation way back in 1982. Both Courts have agreed with the DDA and have dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for interim injunction.

Plaintiff’s Submissions

8. Mr. Kapur, ld. counsel appearing for the Plaintiff has urged before this Court that insofar as the DDA is concerned, the issue only relates to 2 Bighas and