Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CS SCJ 826/2023
Praveen Kumar Arora Vs. The Life Insurance Corporation &
Ors.
19.04.2023
Present : Sh. M L Garg, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff along-with
plaintiff.
1. The present suit is a suit filed by the plaintiff seeking a
decree of mandatory and permanent injunction against the
defendants.
2. In brief, the case of the plaintiff is that the partnership
firm “Bhagwan Das and Company” of which, he is a partner, was
running a shop of general items in property no. 1515-1517
(municipal no. 1495) at Ground Floor, Shankar Niwas Building,
Baghirath Palace, Chandni Chowk, Delhi which was a tenanted shop
(herein after referred to a suit property) under the tenancy of
defendant no. 1 and a monthly rent of Rs. 9628/- excluding water and
electricity charge was regularly being paid by the said firm in respect
of the same to the defendant. However, on 25.03.2023, when the son
of the plaintiff visited the suit property, he found some police officers
and officials of defendant no. 1 present there who took over the
possession of the suit property and directed him to remove all his
goods on 26.03.2023. Accordingly, on the next day, the son of the
plaintiff withdrew all his goods from the suit premises.
3. However, the case of the plaintiff is that since he was
regularly paying the rent of the suit property without any default and
had also spent lacks of rupees on the suit property in the form of
furniture etc., which are still lying fitted inside the suit property, and
was illegally thrown out of the suit property by the officials of the
CS SCJ 826/2023 Page 1 of 3
-- 1 of 3 --
defendant no. 1 by putting their lock on the shutter of the suit
property, a decree of permanent and mandatory injunction may be
passed in his favor so as to direct the defendant no. 1 to remove his
lock from the suit property and it may further be permanently
restrained from restraining the plaintiff from running his business in
the suit property.
4. I have already perused the entire suit and have also heard
the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
5. Thus, as is apparent from the pleadings of suit of the
plaintiff, partnership firm “Bhagwan Das and Company” is stated to
be a tenant inside the suit property which has been already
dispossessed from the same on 25.03.2023. However, the present
suit has not been filed by the alleged tenant firm. Further, though the
present suit has been filed by the plaintiff as a partner of the
abovesaid firm, however, no document is filed alongwith the plaint to
show whether the said firm is registered or not so as to show that the
plaintiff has any such authority to institute the present suit on its
behalf. Further, the pleading of the plaint also make it clear that by
way of present suit the plaintiff is in fact seeking the recovery of
possession of the suit property in the garb of injunction and has also
attempted to escape the payment of appropriate court fee on such
relief. Moreover, in view of facts disclosed in the plaint only a suit
for recovery of possession on the basis of previous title, i.e, being a
lessee, lie.
6. Hence, the suit of the plaintiff is non maintainable in the
present form. The plaint of the plaintiff as such is liable to be
rejected and stands rejected accordingly under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
CS SCJ 826/2023 Page 2 of 3
-- 2 of 3 --
7. Let the file be consigned to record room as per rules
8. Copy of order be given dasti.
Balwinder Singh
SCJ-cum-RC: Central District:
19.04.2023
CS SCJ 826/2023 Page 3 of 3
-- 3 of 3 --