A court may pass a judgment or decree based on clear and unequivocal admissions made by a party in any form, including oral or written statements made in other proceedings (such as criminal complaints), to facilitate speedy justice under O.12 R.6 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

O R D E R

1. This petition arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 22.09.2022 in Regular Second Appeal No.92/2022 preferred by the petitioner before us by which the Second Appeal came to be dismissed by the High Court thereby affirming the original judgment and decree passed by the trial Signature Not Verified Digitaclly soignued bryt and also the judgment and order passed by the First Appellate NEHA GUPTA Date: 2026.05.08 Reason:

Court.

2. It appears from the materials on record that the respondents (original plaintiffs) before us instituted Civil Suit No.1162/2019 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, South District, Saket Court, New Delhi for declaration and permanent injunction with respect to an open plot of land bearing No.P-229 out of Khasra No.431/260 Joga Bai Extension, Nafis Road, Jamia Nagar, Okhla, Batla House, New Delhi ad measuring 260 Sq. Yards.

3. It is the case of the original plaintiff that the subject plot was purchased by them from one Shri Dilbar Husain Malik by way of a General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell and Affidavit respectively dated 27.11.2000 for a total sale consideration of Rs.80,000/-. According to the plaintiffs, the appellant before us was appointed as a caretaker / Chowkidar of the subject plot. According to the plaintiffs, the petitioner was permitted to stay in the suit property so that the property could also be taken care of. When time came for the petitioner (defendant) to vacate, he declined and that led to the filing of the suit praying for the following reliefs:-

“a) To declare that General Power of Attorney, agreement to sell, affidavit, receipt and will dated: 09.07.1996 in respect of the suit property executed by Shri Dilawar Husain Mallik in favour of Shaikh Abidin are invalid/void and nonest/illegal.

b) To permanently restrain the defendants from raising any construction over the suit property i.e. plot bearing No. P-229 out of khasra No. 431/260 Joga Bai Extension, Nafis Road, Jamia Nagar, Okhla batla House, New Delhi.

c) To permanently restrain the defendants and their agents from creating any third party interest in respect of the suit property i.e. plot bearing No. P-229 out of khasra No.431/260 Joga Bai, Nafis Road, Jamia Nagar, Okhla batla House, New Delhi.

d) Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court deem, fit and proper in the above said facts and circumstances.”

4. In the Civil Suit instituted by the plaintiffs, an application came to be preferred by the plaintiffs under Order XII Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“CPC”). In the said application, the plaintiffs prayed for the following reliefs:-

“A) Allow the present application and pass a decree of mandatory injunction in favour of the plaintiff and direct the defendant to remove all his belongings and handed over the possession of the plot No- P-229, Khasra No. 43/260, Joga Bai Extension, Nafis Road, Jamia Nagar, Okhla, Batla House, New Delhi in the interest of justice.

Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

5. On the strength of the application preferred by the plaintiffs under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, the Civil Court proceeded to pass the final decree vide order dated 16.10.2020. The operative part of the order passed by the trial court reads thus:-

“8. Thus, in view of the above mentioned judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, plaintiff being the caretaker of the suit property has no right, title and interest in the same and his possession cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely & cannot be protected as such. The filling of the present suit by the plaintiff is sufficient notice to the defendant to vacate the suit premises. However, it is a matter of record that the same has not been handed over to the plaintiff.

9. Plaintiff is, thus, entitled to a decree as prayed for