JUDGMENT :

1. The instant petitions have been filed by the Petitioners herein challenging the Order dated 07.02.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in CM(M) No. 1168/2021 & CM(M) No. 537/2019; order dated 04.03.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in REVIEW PET. No. 53/2022 and order dated 27.01.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in CM Nos. 48565/2022 & 49947/2022 in CM(M) No. 1168/2021 & CM Nos. 48560/2022 & 49954/2022 in CM(M) No. 537/2019. This case has a chequered history.

2. The Respondent No. 1 herein is the Plaintiff in a suit being CS No. 57749/2016. The case of the Plaintiff is that he along with his deceased uncle - late Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj (Grand-father of Petitioners No. 1 & 2 herein) purchased a plot bearing No. 1, Golf Links, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit property’) vide sale deed dated 25.04.1964. It is stated that two different houses were constructed on the said plot. It is stated that eastern side of the house is in the possession of Respondent No. 1/Plaintiff and the western side of the house is in possession of Petitioners herein/Defendants No. 2 to 4. It is stated that Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj passed away in 1976 and he was survived by his wife, namely, Sudershan Bajaj, and two sons, namely, Ashok Bajaj & Rajiv Bajaj. It is stated that a Memorandum of Agreement was executed between Respondent No. 1 herein/Plaintiff and the legal heirs of late Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj on 17.12.1993. It is stated that the Plaintiff and the legal heirs of late Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj filed a joint application for conversion of the suit property from leasehold to freehold. It is stated that Ms. Sudershan Bajaj, i.e. the wife of late Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj passed away in 2006 and Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, i.e. the son of late Sh. Jagdish Lal Bajaj and Father of the Petitioners herein, passed away in 2009. It is stated that after the death of Ms. Sudershan Bajaj & Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, the Petitioners herein were not co-operating with the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 for conversion of the suit property from leasehold to freehold and the process was getting stalled. It is also stated that the Petitioners herein/Defendants No. 2 to 4 were neither depositing their share of ground rent, nor house tax towards their portion of the suit property to the Land Development Office (hereinafter referred to as ‘the L&DO’). It is stated that in April 2013 when the Respondent No. 1 herein/Plaintiff approached the L&DO for conversion of the suit property from leasehold to freehold, he was informed that conversion can only be done if all the parties jointly approach the L&DO. Thereafter, suit, being CS No. 57749/2016, was filed by the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 herein with the following reliefs:

“A. Pass a decree of declaration that the Memorandum of Agreement dated December 17, 1993 is binding upon the plaintiff and defendant nos. 1-4;

B. Pass a decree of Mandatory injunction thereby directing defendant nos. 1 - 4 to execute any/all documents in the office of defendant no. 5, jointly along with the plaintiff, for the purposes of mutation and conversion from leasehold to freehold property bearing municipal no. 1, Golf Links, New Delhi;

C. Pass a decree of Mandatory Injunction thereby directing the defendant nos. 1 - 4 to pay all charges to defendant no. 5 for mutating the western portion (marked in red in the Map) in their favour;

D. Pass a decree of Mandatory Injunction thereby directing the defendant nos. 1 - 4 to pay all charges to defendant no. 5, jointly along with the plaintiff, for conversion of property bearing municipal no. 1, Golf Links, New Delhi from leasehold to freehold;

E Pass a decree of Permanent Injunction thereby restraining the defendant nos. 1 - 4 from selling, alienating, transferring, creating third party rights and/or parting with possession of the western portion (marked in red in the Map) till the western portion of the property bearing municipal no. 1, Golf Links, New Delhi is mutated in their joint names and convert