Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Veena Bhojwani & Anr. - Appellantss
Versus
Anju Jani - Respondent
First Appeal From Order No. 210 of 2021, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 30419 of 2021
Decided On : 24-01-2022
Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 - Possession of Property - The court modified the impugned order to restrain the appellant from interfering with the peaceful possession of the respondent, despite the respondent not being in possession of the subject property. The appellants were also directed not to create any third party rights in the property until the disposal of the suit.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, which was allowed, directing the appellants not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent in the subject property. The respondent was not in possession of the property at the time of the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court modified the impugned order to limit the restraint on the appellants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the respondent, and also directed the appellants not to create any third party rights in the property until the disposal of the suit.
Issues: The main issue was the possession of the subject property and the applicability of the impugned order when the respondent was not in possession.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that the factual observations and findings returned by the trial court in the impugned order shall be treated as prima facie findings and shall not be relied on at the time of final disposal of the suit and shall have no bearing on the merit of the case of either party.
Final Decision: The impugned order was modified to restrain the appellant from interfering with the peaceful possession of the respondent, and the appellants were directed not to create any third party rights in the property until the disposal of the suit.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. appellants impugn order dated 23.02.2021 whereby the application filed by respondent (plaintiff) under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 has been allowed and the appellants have been directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent in the subject property and also not to create any third party rights in the suit property till the disposal of the suit.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that admittedly respondent was not in possession of the subject property as is evident from an application filed by the respondent before the Trial Court dated 12.07.2019 wherein it is specifically mentioned that respondent was evicted from the suit property pursuant to an order passed by the District Magistrate under the Maintenance & Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens act and possession was handed over on 04.07.2019.
4. Learned counsel for respondent concedes that respondent is not in possession of the subject property.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants undertakes that appellants shall maintain status quo with regard to the ground floor of the subject property and shall not create any third party interest in the subject property till the disposal of the suit.
6. The undertaking is accepted.
7. Learned counsel for the parties submits that since respondent is not in possession of the subject property, the impugned order dated 23.02.2021 be modified to the limited extent that it directs appellants not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the respondent in the subject property.
8. accordingly, this appeal is disposed of and impugned order dated 23.02.2021 is modified to the limited extent that it restrains the appellant from interfering in the peaceful possession of the respondent.
9. However, keeping in view of the undertaking given by the appellants, appellants shall not create any third party rights in the subject property till the disposal of the suit.
10. It is further clarified that the factual observations and findings returned by the trial court in the impugned order shall be treated as prima facie findings and shall not be relied on at the time of final disposal of the suit and shall have no bearing on the merit of the case of either party.
11. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
12. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through e-mail by the Court Master.
The court clarified the limited extent of the restraint on the appellants and emphasized that the factual observations and findings in the impugned order shall not have a bearing on the final disposa....
The court clarified that an injunction cannot stand if the party seeking it is not presently in possession of the property.
The court affirmed that joint possession rights require cooperation among parties, and legal ownership secured through a relinquishment deed prevails against claims of occupancy by estranged family m....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the appellant to show evidence of dispossession and the significance of previous judicial findings on possession.
Possession established by the Respondent cannot be overcome by mere claims of ownership from the Appellant without substantial evidence of prior dispossession.
The possession of the respondents in the suit property is recorded in the revenue record and the court found no manifest error in the findings of the trial and appellate courts.
Court emphasizes the requirement of notifying intentions to create third-party rights in property pending adjudication of application, upholding status quo.
The court upheld the interim order restraining unauthorized construction on the property during the pendency of the partition suit, emphasizing the prohibition of actions that could cause irreparable....
In property disputes involving conflicting claims, the court must evaluate the evidence presented to determine the balance of convenience and the necessity for a trial to resolve ownership issues.
Status quo orders in property disputes must be based on clear findings of possession; courts must protect property rights during litigation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
