Final Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. SANA KHAN, CIVIL JUDGE-05:
CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
Suit No. 1884/25
CNR No.DLCT-03-006352-2025
Smt. Anju Sharma
W/o Shri Kamal Sharma
R/o D-13, Shubham Enclave,
Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110063.
Through her SPA
Shri Kamal Sharma
S/o Late Shri Mahi Lal Sharma
....Plaintiff
Smt. Seema
W/o Shri Manoj Kumar
R/o House No.1542,
Second Floor Dina Nath Building,
Subzi Mandi, Delhi-110007.
…..Defendant
Date of Institution : 13.10.2025
Date of decision : 29.05.2026
Decision : Decreed
Anju Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena page no. 1 of 5
-- 1 of 5 --
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit is filed by the plaintiff against the
defendant, seeking recovery of possession of second floor of suit
property bearing H. No.1542, Dina Nath Building, Subzi Mandi,
Delhi-110007 along with arrears of rent and occupation charges.
2. Plaintiff has filed the present suit through her husband/
SPA Sh. Kamal Sharma, who is stated to have personal
knowledge about the present case. The brief facts of the case, as
per the plaint, are that plaintiff is the owner of the suit property.
Further that, defendant was inducted as a tenant at the second
floor of the suit property w.e.f. 20.03.2020 vide a registered
Lease Deed, initially for two years. After the expiry of the term
of the Lease, the tenancy continued on month to month rent basis
and the last agreed rate of rent was Rs.13,500/-. That, defendant
stopped paying rent from April 2025. That, when despite
repeated requests, defendant did not clear the arrears of rent,
plaintiff served a legal notice upon her, thereby terminating the
tenancy and asking her to vacate the suit premises and clear all
outstanding dues. Despite service of notice, defendant neither
complied with the demand, nor vacated the premises. Hence, the
present suit was filed.
3. Summons of the present suit were issued upon the
defendant. Defendant was duly served through her husband.
Despite service, defendant did not enter appearance.
Consequently, she was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated
11.02.2026.
Anju Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena page no. 2 of 5
-- 2 of 5 --
4. In evidence, SPA/Sh. Kamal Sharma, examined himself
and relied upon the following documents i.e. Original SPA- Ex.
PW1/1, Copy of Registered Rent Agreement dated 20.03.2020-
Ex.PW1/2(OSR), Site plan- Ex.PW1/3, Carbon copy of legal
notice dated 07.02.2025-Ex.PW1/4 and postal receipt- Ex.PW1/5
5. Plaintiff chose not to examine any other witnesses. Hence,
PE was closed. Ex-parte final arguments were addressed by
counsel for plaintiff.
6. I have given careful consideration to the arguments
putforth and documents filed on behalf of plaintiff.
FINDINGS
7. The present suit is filed by plaintiff through her
husband/SPA holder Sh. Kamal Sharma. In support of his
authority, Sh. Kamal Sharma filed the original SPA Ex.PW1/1
executed by plaintiff in his favour. He also filed a copy of the
Lease Deed Ex.PW1/2(OSR) by way of which, defendant was
inducted as a tenant in the suit property. Ex.PW1/2 establishes
the relationship of landlord & tenant between the parties, as well
as the possession of the defendant over the suit property. Sh.
Kamal Sharma also filed a copy of the legal notice Ex.PW1/4, by
virtue of which the tenancy was terminated. Although, he also
filed a copy of the postal receipt Ex.PW1/5, however, the same
does not establish that the legal notice was duly served upon the
defendant.
Anju Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena page no. 3 of 5
-- 3 of 5 --
8. Nevertheless, it is well settled that filing of a suit amounts
to an unequivocal expression of landlord’s intention to terminate
the tenancy. Therefore, even assuming that notice of termination
was not duly served, the institution of the present suit constitutes
sufficient notice, terminating the tenancy.
9. Since defendant chose not to appear and contest the suit
despite being served, the averments in the plaint as well as the
documents filed in support of the plaint, have gone unchallenged.
The testimony of plaintiff remained unrebutted. As such, the
court has no reasons to disbelieve the testimony of plaintiff that
defendant is in possession of the suit property despite termination
of tenancy and has also not paid rent/ occupation charges w.e.f.
April 2025.
10. After termination of tenancy, defendant has no right to
remain in possession of the suit property. Accordingly, the
present suit stands decreed.
11. Plaintiff has also claimed damages/mesne profits for
unauthorized use and occupation @ Rs.20,000/-per month.
However, apart from bald assertions, no documentary evidence
has been led to establish that the prevalent rate of rent of the suit
property is Rs.20,000/- per month. Hence, the claim for damages
@ Rs.20,000/- cannot be accepted. Considering that the last
admitted rent was Rs.13,500/- per month, this court finds it
appropriate to award mesne profits @ Rs.13,500/- per month
from the date of termination of tenancy till delivery of the vacant
Anju Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena page no. 4 of 5
-- 4 of 5 --
possession of the suit property.
RELIEF
12. Plaintiff is held entitled to recover possession of the suit
property from the defendant. Plaintiff is also held entitled to
recover Rs.54,000/- towards arrears of rent from 01.04.2025 till
31.07.2025. Plaintiff is also held entitled to recover occupation
charges @Rs.13,500/- per month from 01.08.2025 till actual
possession of the suit property is handed over, subject to paying
deficient court fees. Plaintiff is held entitled to interest @ 8% per
annum on the arrears of rent as well as occupation charges. No
order as to costs.
13. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
14. File be consigned to record room after due
compliance.
Announced in the open court
on 29.05.2026
(Sana Khan)
Civil Judge-05, Central District
Tis Hazari Courts,Delhi
Anju Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena page no. 5 of 5
-- 5 of 5 --