EX.P. 95/2018 Page 1 of 35

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment Reserved on : 19^th May, 2022.

Judgment Delivered on : 14^th July, 2022

+

EX.P. 95/2018

SARVINDER SINGH & ANR.

..... Decree Holders

Through:

Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal, Advocate.

versus

VIPUL TANDON

..... Judgement Debtor

Through:

Ms. Anita Sahani, Advocate for

Objector Ms. Pallavi Parmar and Ms.

Ritambra Kaushik, Advocates for

applicant

in

E.A.165/2019

and

IA166/2019

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

JUDGMENT

AMIT BANSAL, J.

E.A. 175/2019 (of Vikram Badhwar for placing on record additional

facts), I.A. 297/ ( of the LRs of Late Shri Uday Vir Viraj u/O VI R 17 of

CPC) and I.A. 298/2019 (of the Shakuntala Srivastava u/O VI R 17 of

CPC)

1.

No opposition has been raised on behalf of the Decree Holder to the

captioned applications.

2.

For the reasons stated in the applications, the same are allowed.

3.

The additional facts pleaded in E.A. 175/2019 are taken on record.

4.

As prayed for in I.A. 297/2019 and I.A. 298/2019, the request of the

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002577

EX.P. 95/2018 Page 2 of 35

applicants for amendment of the prayer is allowed.

E.A. 535/2018(of the Vikram Badhwar u/O-XXI R-99 r/w R-101 and

106 of CPC), EA 165/2019(of Shakuntala Srivastava u/O-XXI R-99, 100

& 101 of CPC), EA 166/2019(of Udayan Parmar & Ors u/O-XXI R-99,

100 & 101 of CPC), E.A.1395/2021 (of the Vikram Badhwar u/S 144 of

CPC), E.A. 176/2019 (of the Vikram Badhwar u/S 151 of CPC) & E.A.

177/2019 (of the Vikram Badhwar u/S 151 of CPC for status quo ante)

5.

E.A. 535/2018 has been filed on behalf of the Objector/Vikram

Badhwar, under Order XXI Rules 99, 101 and 106 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking relief of status quo ante and stay of the

warrant of possession issued by the Registrar General of this Court in

respect of the three floors with lawn and terrace and four servant quarters in

the property bearing No. 27, Rajpur Road, Delhi-110054 (suit property).

6.

E.A.1395/2021 has been filed on behalf of Objector/Vikram Badhwar,

under section 144 of CPC seeking payment of mesne profits and damages

for wrongful dispossession and E.A. 176/2019 has been filed on behalf of

Vikram Badhwar for restraining the Decree Holders from creating third

party rights in the suit property and E.A. 177/2019 has been filed on behalf

of Vikram Badhwar seeking restoration of possession of the third floor of

the suit property.

7.

E.A. 165/2019 and E.A. 166/2019 have been filed on behalf of the

Objectors/ Smt. Shakuntala Srivastava and Late Shri Udayvir Viraj through

legal representatives (LRs) respectively, under Order XXI Rules 99, 100 and

101 of the CPC seeking relief of declaration that there is a valid Sale Deed

in their favour and the decree is inoperative against them and restoration of

possession of the two servants quarters, part of the suit property.

8.

No replies to the aforesaid applications have been filed on behalf of

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002577

EX.P. 95/2018 Page 3 of 35

the Decree Holders, only written submissions/additional written submissions

have been filed.

Case set up by the Objector/Vikram Badhwar HUF

9.

The case set up by the Objector/ Vikram Badhwar HUF is that:-

i.

The father of the Objector purchased the ground and first floor of the

suit property vide Sale Deed dated 6^th September, 1988, from Dr.

Satyendra Singh, the father of the Decree Holder, Sarvinder Singh,

through Smt. Nirmal Satyendra Singh, the mother of the decree

holder.

ii.

The father of the Objector entered