* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 07^th January, 2026 Pronounced on: 24th March, 2026 + RFA 977/2025 & CM APPL. 66417/2025 KANISHKA SABHARWAL S/o Shri Daulat Ram, R/o Village Dungdhar Pori Garhwal, Uttarakhand .....Appellant Through: Mr. Pushpendu Shukla, Advocate Versus

1. SHRI SURESH KUMAR (SINCE DECEASED)

THROUGH HIS LRS& ORS.

i. Sh. Shashank@ Shan Bharti - (son)

ii. Sh. Dinesh Kumar Bharti - (son)

iii. Smt. Nirmala Bharti - (wife)

2. Shri Ram Shankar S/o Sh. Sardar Singh 3. Shri R.A. Siddiqui S/o Sh. M.A. Siddiqui

4. Shri Bajrang Garg S/o Sh. Panna Lal Garg

5. Shri Raghunandan @ Lucky S/o Sh. Jagat Ram

6. Shri Manoj Kumar S/o late Sh. Tara Chand

7. Shr. M.K. Singh S/o Sh. Bitto Singh

8. Shri Bijender Dabas S/o Sh. N.S. Dabas .....Respondents Through: None CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. The Regular First Appeal is filed by the Appellant herein under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’), 1908, against the Order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the Ld. District Judge-06, Delhi thereby allowing Application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC r/w Section 151 CPC of Respondent No. 1 (through LRs and Respondents No. 6 to 8) and rejecting the Suit of the Appellant/Plaintiff for Declaration, Recovery of Possession, Mesne Profits and Permanent Injunction.

2. The Plaintiff/Appellant filed a CS No. 533/19, titled Kanishka Sabharwal vs. Shri Suresh Kumar and Ors. for Declaration, Recovery of Possession, Mesne Profits and Permanent Injunction.

3. The brief facts are that the Plaintiff claimed ownership of property plot no. 47(old), new no. 140, measuring 79 sq yds, forming part of Khasra No. 77/7, situated in the abadi known as Nihal Vihar, Nangloi, Delhi- 110041 (hereinafter referred to as “the Suit property”), having purchased it from Defendant No.1, Shri Suresh Kumar (since deceased) through namely registered GPA, Agreement to Sell, Affidavit, Receipt, Will and Possession Letter, all dated 15.05.2001.

4. Thereafter, Plaintiff claimed that he raised the boundary wall and installed a gate, at his own expense and kept the property locked under his own lock and keys, with the intention of constructing his residence thereon, while he was residing as a tenant at H.No.604, 6th Floor, Rohini Heights, Sector-29, Rohini, Delhi-110089.

5. Defendant No.1 allegedly remained in contact with the Plaintiff and his family members. In the year 2006, Defendant No.1 approached the Plaintiff‟s mother on the pretext of arranging sale of the property and obtained from her the original previous title documents dated 23.12.1999 executed by Smt. Harpreet Kaur w/o Sh. Rajinder Singh, in his favour.

6. According to the Plaintiff, despite repeated demands, Defendant No.1 neither returned the documents nor produced any purchaser till the year 2008. In October 2008, one Sh. Nagender Chaudhary, a property dealer of M/s T.S. Properties, at RZG-33, Main road, 50 ft wide road, Nihal Vihar, Delhi had telephonically informed the Plaintiff‟s father that he had purchased the Suit property from Defendant No.1.

7. The Plaintiff and his father showed him the copies of the title documents dated 15.05.2001 in their favour and asserted that Defendant No.1 had no right to sell the property after that date, whereupon Nagender Chaudhary refused to produce his documents and threatened them with murder and dire consequences, if they visited the plot again.

8. The Plaintiff lodged a Complaint at P.S. Prashant Vihar, and the investigation was conducted by ASI Randhir Singh of P.S. Paschim Vihar. On 08.11.2008, upon coming to know that construction was being raised at the property, he objected and made another Complaint dated 09.11.2008 at PP Nihal Vihar, whereafter construction was stopped with police intervention.

9. A further written Complaint dated 15.11.2008 was also sent to the Incharge, Police Post Nihal Vihar, P.S. Paschim Vihar, DCP, West Dist., ACP West Distt, Delhi and to BSES Rajdhani Po