Interim Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: EX 4259/24
Ajay Kumar Sharma Vs. Shrichand Yadav since deceased
04.07.2025
Present :- Sh. R.K Singh, Ld. Counsel for DH.
Ms. Sana Ansari, Ld. Counsel for JD.
Ms. Zubeda Begum, Ld. Counsel for Objector Lata
Rani Sharma.
As mentioned in the last order, copy of order dated
16.01.2025 passed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has been received
by which JD had undertaken to vacate the subject premises by
30.06.2025 subject to payment of use and occupation charges in the
sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month.
It is submitted on behalf of DH that JD has not vacated
the subject premises till date and accordingly warrant of possession
may be issued.
On the othe hand, the objections have been filed today
on behalf of JD. After having advanced certain submissions, counsel
for JD has submitted that she may be allowed to withdraw the
objections. Her statement is recorded separately in this regard and
accordingly the objections filed on JD stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Again objections have also been filed on behalf of one
objector namely Smt. Lata Rani Sharma claiming herself to be the co-
owner of the subject premises and it is submitted by the counsel that
the said objector is in possession of the subject premises through the
tenant and accordingly the possession may not be handed over to the
DH.
On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of DH that
said objections have been filed merely to delay the issuance of warrant
of possession and the co-owner has no right to file the objections.
Cont…..
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
Heard. It is observed that it is settled proposition of law
that any one of the co-owners of the tenanted premises can seek the
eviction of the tenant and once the eviction order has been passed the
co-owner cannot challenge the said eviction order stating that he /she
was not willing for said eviction. Accordingly, on the said ground the
objections of the objector Lata Rani Sharma are not maintainble.
Going one step further the objector herself had admitted in the
objections that she had moved an application u/o 1 Rule 10 CPC,
which was dismissed by the trial court. Accordingly when the
objector was not made a party in the eviction petition, there is no
ground to entertain her objections during the execution proceedings.
Moreover the executing court cannot go behind the decree/final order.
In view of abovesaid discussions, the objections filed on
behalf of objector Lata Rani Sharma are also hereby dismissed.
As mentioned above the JD was granted time to vacate
the subject premises till 30.06.2025 and therefore there is no other
reason not to issue warrant of possession against the JD.
Let warrants of possession be issued against the JD and
in favour of the DH, in respect of demised premises i.e. 4507, ground
floor, main road, Pahari Dhiraj, Sadar Bazar, Delhi 06(Ward No. XIII)
as shown in Red Colour in the certified copy of the site plan, subject
to filing of PF.
Further, Bailiff is directed to remove all hurdles
including lock, doors etc. in order to execute present warrants of
possession. Further, Bailiff is directed to take all other necessary
auxiliary steps for execution of present warrants of possession
including break open the locks, if required. DH shall file an affidavit
to the effect that there is no stay or appeal pending on the execution of
Cont….
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
the eviction order. Concerned SHO is directed to provide police aid
and assistance including lady police officer, if required, to the Bailiff
for execution of warrant of possession.
DH is directed to appear before Ld. ACJ for appointment
of Bailiff on 18.07.2025 and for report on 07.08.2025.
(VIVEK KUMAR AGARWAL)
ARC-02 (Central), THC,
04.07.2025
-- 3 of 3 --