Final Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIMESH BHASKAR MANI
TRIPATHI
ACJ-CUM-ARC-CUM-CCJ,
NORTH EAST DISTRICT: KARKARDOOMA COURTS,
DELHI
DLNE030001092025
CS No. 70/2025
Smt. Priya Gupta
W/o Sh. Kapil Gupta
D/o Late Sh. Surender Kumar Gupta
R/o C-66/1 X/1544, Gali No.9,
Rajgarh Colony, Gandhi Nagar,
East Delhi-110031
…......Plaintiff
Versus
1. Sh. Aakash Gupta
S/o Late Sh. Surender Kumar Gupta
R/o V-987, Khasra No. 38,
Third Floor, front side,
Dispensary Wali Gali,
Arvind Nagar Mohalla,
Ghonda, Delhi-110053
Also At:
Sh. Aakash Gupta
C/o Sh. Abhishek Gupta @ Love
S/o Late Sh. Surender Kumar Gupta
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 1 of 6
-- 1 of 6 --
A-34/2, Gali No.1, Main Road
Khasra No. 26-27, Brahampuri,
Delhi-110053
2. Sh. Abhishek Gupta @ Love
S/o Late Sh. Surender Kumar Gupta
A-34/2, Gali No.1, Main Road,
Khasra No. 26-27, Brahampuri,
Delhi-110053
........Defendants
Date of Institution : 17.02.2025
Date of reserving the judgment : 25.08.2025
Date of Judgment : 25.08.2025
Decision : Decreed
SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1. Vide this judgment, I shall decide the suit for permanent
injunction filed by the plaintiff against the defendants.
Pleadings of the plaintiff:-
2. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit seeking a decree
of permanent injunction in respect of property bearing House No.
A-34/2, Gali No. 1, Khasra No. 26-27, Main Road, Brahampuri,
Delhi, admeasuring 50 square yards, forming part of Khasra No.
26-27, situated in the area of Village Ghonda, abadi known as
Gali No. 1, Main Road, Brahampuri, Delhi (hereinafter referred
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 2 of 6
-- 2 of 6 --
to as “the suit property”).
3. It is the case of the plaintiff that his father, late Sh.
Surender Kumar Gupta, was the owner and landlord of the suit
property, having purchased the same on the strength of sale
documents executed in his favour. The mother of the plaintiff,
Smt. Mamta Devi Gupta, had expired earlier on 21.06.2012, and
thereafter, the father of the plaintiff also expired on 18.04.2020.
Upon the demise of his parents, the plaintiff, along with the other
legal heirs, succeeded to the estate left behind by his late father,
which includes the suit property.
4. The grievance of the plaintiff is that after the death of his
father, defendants no. 1 and 2, who have been residing in the suit
property, started asserting hostile claims over the same and
attempted to sell the suit property without the consent of the
plaintiff and without giving him his lawful share. The plaintiff
contends that no partition has taken place amongst the legal heirs
in respect of the suit property, and therefore, the defendants
cannot claim any exclusive right or proceed to alienate the same.
5. On these averments, the plaintiff has approached this Court
seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the
defendants from selling, transferring, alienating or creating any
third-party interest in the suit property.
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 3 of 6
-- 3 of 6 --
Ex parte evidence: -
6. In ex-parte PE, to prove her case, plaintiff deposed as
PW1. Plaintiff tendered her ex-parte evidence by way of
affidavit as Ex. PW1/1 wherein she reiterated the facts mentioned
in plaint and relied upon following documents:-
1. Copy of Aadhar Card of plaintiff Ex. PW1/A (OSR).
2. Copy of Voter ID of plaintiff Ex. PW 1/B (OSR)
3. Site plan Ex. PW1/C
4. Copy of Electricity Bill Mark ‘A’
7. Thereafter, ex-parte PE was closed vide order dated
06.08.2025 and matter was listed for ex-parte final arguments.
8. I have heard the ex-parte final arguments on behalf of the
plaintiff and perused the record.
Decision with reasons:-
9. In the case in hand, plaintiff is seeking a relief of
permanent injunction against the defendants that the defendants
be restrained from creating any third party interest in the suit
party. They be directed not to disposes the plaintiff without
following due process of law.
10. It is a settled position of law that when defendants are
proceeded ex parte, the Court is duty-bound to assess whether the
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 4 of 6
-- 4 of 6 --
plaintiff has been able to make out a case on the basis of her
pleadings and unrebutted evidence.
11. In the present case, the testimony of PW1 has gone
unrebutted and unchallenged as no cross-examination has been
carried out by the defendants. The affidavit Ex. PW1/1, coupled
with the supporting documents, establishes that the plaintiff is
one of the legal heirs of late Sh. Surender Kumar Gupta, who
was the purchaser/owner of the suit property.
12. The defendants have not appeared to contest the claim
nor to deny the allegation that they are attempting to alienate the
property without partition or consent of the plaintiff. Thus, the
plaintiff’s apprehension appears to be bona fide and supported by
evidence.
13. It is also settled law that every co-owner has a right to
protect the property from unlawful alienation by another co-
owner. Injunction can be granted to preserve the property till the
rights of the parties are properly determined. Reference may be
made to
Anathula Sudhakar vs. P. Buchi Reddy (2008) 4 SCC
594, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that an injunction
suit is maintainable to restrain threatened unlawful alienation or
dispossession.
14. In view of the unrebutted testimony of the plaintiff, the
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 5 of 6
-- 5 of 6 --
documentary evidence on record, and in the absence of any
defence from the defendants, I am of the considered opinion that
the plaintiff has successfully established her entitlement to relief.
RELIEF
15. In view of the above, the suit of plaintiff is hereby
allowed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants whereby
defendants are hereby restrained from creating any third party
interest in the suit party and dispossess the plaintiff from the suit
property without following the due process of law. No order as to
cost.
16. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
17. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open court (Animesh Bhaskar Mani Tripathi)
on 25th August 2025 ACJ-cum-ARC-cum-CCJ
North-East District, KKD, Delhi
CS No. 70/2025
Priya Gupta Vs. Sh. Aakash Gupta
Page No 6 of 6
-- 6 of 6 --