Interim Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Civ Suit 44/23
Mahender Kumar Thukral Vs. Khalid Salmani
26.07.2023
Present: Sh. D. K. Malhotra, learned counsel for the plaintiff.
Sh. Shazan Khan, learned counsel for defendant.
1. Parties have filed their affidavits of admission/denial of
documents. Copies exchanged.
2. On the last date of hearing, an objection was taken on behalf
of the defendant regarding additional documents filed by the plaintiff
alongwith his replication.
3.1. It is stated by the learned counsel for the defendant that these
additional document cannot be taken on record without leave of the court.
3.2. Per contra, it is stated by the learned counsel for the plaintiff
that all the documents which were filed with the replication are in answer
to the pleas raised by the defendant in his written statement. He further
stated that by way of these documents, he is not setting up a new case and
that these documents are necessary to determine the real question in
controversy between the parties in the present suit. He also placed
reliance on a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the
case of Vikram Kaushik & Anr. vs Vivek Kaushik, decided on 13
December, 2011, wherein it was held as under:-
“14. It is the admitted position that the
said documents were filed before the
framing of issues. The Court while
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
exercising its discretion can allow the
party to file the additional documents
before framing of issues if the same are
required for the purpose of deciding the
real controversy between the parties.
Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs'
application is allowed and the documents
filed by the plaintiffs vide list of
documents dated 09.12.2012 are taken on
record”.
4. Heard. File perused.
5.1. Briefly stated, the plaintiff has filed the present suit for
permanent injunction, possession and recovery of arrears of rent/mesne
profits.
5.2. It is the case of the plaintiff that he is the absolute owner in
possession of the suit property while defendant is his tenant. He has
averred that he has terminated the tenancy of the defendant by issuing
notice dated 24.12.2022 but the tenant has not vacated the premises
though he has received the notice. Hence, the present suit. Along with the
plaint, he had filed rent receipts and copy of legal notice dated
24.12.2022.
6. Pursuant to the summons issued by the court, defendant
entered appearance and filed his written statement wherein he denied the
“landlord-tenant” relationship and claims to have become owner by
adverse possession. He has stated that plaintiff has no right, title or
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
interest in the suit property and that he may be put to strict proof thereof.
7. The plaintiff has filed replication controverting the defence and has
also filed additional documents regarding ownership of the property. He
has taken a plea that to meet the case set up by the defendant in written
statement, he has filed these documents.
8. Under these circumstances, keeping in view the overall conspectus
of the case, I am of the view that the additional documents filed along
with the replication are essential for the purpose of deciding the real
controversy between the parties. Therefore, the documents filed by the
plaintiff along with the replication vide list of documents dated 19th April,
2023 are taken on record.
9. List the matter on 27.09.2023 for framing of issues.
(Babita Puniya)
SCJ-cum-RC,
North East District,
KKD/Delhi/26.07.2023
AG
-- 3 of 3 --