Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 7 CS DJ 1065/24
LAXMI DEVI AND ANR Vs. HEMRAJ AND ORS30.07.2025
Present : Sh. Ajay Mahla, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Vishal Chhillar, Ld. counsel for defendants no. 1 and 2
with defendant no. 1.
Ms. Shefali Jain, Ld. counsel for defendant no. 3 with
defendant no. 3.
Sh. Ram Ashish Yadav, Ld. counsel for defendant no. 4 with
defendant no. 4.
Fresh Vakalatnama is filed by Ld. Counsel for defendants no. 1
and 2.
Written statement has been filed by the defendants no. 1 and 2.
Written statement has previously been filed on behalf of defendant no. 3 along
with an application for condonation of delay and documents.
An application for direction for installation of new electricity
connection in the premises of the defendant no. 1, filed on behalf of the
defendant no. 1 is pending.
An application under Section 151 of CPC seeking permission for
installing electricity meter on ground floor of plot no. 73, B-Block, Aggarwal
Colony, Rani Khera, Kanjhawala, Delh-110081 filed on behalf of the
defendant no. 3 is pending.
Arguments are heard on the applications.
Ld. counsels for defendant no. 1 and defendant no. 3 submit that
their applications may be treated as one under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC.
The request is allowed.
-- 1 of 5 --
(2)
Ld. counsels for applicants submit that electricity is a basic
amenity. They submit that the electricity supplier company (NDPL) is willing
to provide electricity connection but it is being objected to by parties to the
suit.
Ld. counsels for parties, after arguments, submit that they have
no objection if the applications are allowed.
The statements of the parties are recorded separately. Parties
shall remain bound by their statements.
In view of the statements recorded, the applications are disposed
off with directions that defendant no. 1 and defendant no. 3 are at liberty to
apply for installation of electricity connections and that NDPL is at liberty to
install electricity connections at the premises occupied by the respective
applicants, pursuant to their applications for electricity connections, if the
applications are found to be in order. It is directed that the parties to the suit
shall not object to the installation of the said electricity connections.
The aforesaid direction is only interim in nature and in case, at
the conclusion of trial, it is found that the respective applicant was not entitled
to installation of electricity connection, the said connection shall be liable to
be removed.
An application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section
151 of CPC filed on behalf of plaintiff is pending.
The application is taken up for hearing.
-- 2 of 5 --
(3)
By the said application, the plaintiff has made the following
prayer:
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this
Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to pass an
Order of ad-interim injunction in favour of the
plaintiffs and against the defendants thereby
restraining the defendants, their legal heirs, from
usurping the entire share of plaintiff in the suit
property i.e. plot no. 73, Block B, Khasra no. 40,
Agarwal Colony, Rani Khera, Kanjhawala, Delhi,
by creating any third party interest, right, title and
further be restrained from dealing in any manner,
transferring or and parting with the possession of
any portion of the suit property as mentioned.
Any other or further relief(s) which this Hon’ble
court may deem fit and proper may kindly be passed
in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants, in
the interest of justice and equity.”
I have heard arguments in respect of the application.
The case of the plaintiffs is that the suit property had been
purchased by their father Sh. Pancham Singh. It is stated in the plaint that
defendants no. 1 and 2 started residing on the first floor of the property. It is
further stated in the plaint that the plaintiffs and defendants no. 1 and 2
allowed defendant no. 3 to reside on the ground floor of the property after
demise of father of plaintiffs. It is stated in the plaint that father of the
plaintiffs died intestate.
-- 3 of 5 --
(4)
Th share of the plaintiffs is still to be determined. In case the
suit property is disposed off by the defendants, an innocent purchaser may get
embroiled into the controversy. This may lead to multiplicity of proceedings.
The suit property requires to be preserved till the rival contentions are
adjudicated.
A prima facie case is made out in favour of the plaintiffs.
Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs
will suffer irreparable injury if temporary injunction is not granted in their
favour.
It is directed that till further orders, third party interest shall not
be created in the suit property and possession of the suit property shall not be
transferred to any third party, by the defendants.
The application is disposed off.
List for further proceedings on 11.03.2026.
Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. counsels for parties.
(Ashish Aggarwal)
District Judge-III
North-West District,
Rohini Courts, Delhi
30.07.2025
30.07.2025
File is taken up again on the appearance of Senior Legal
Executive for NDPL.
-- 4 of 5 --
(5)
Present : Sh. Deepak Kumar, Senior Legal Executive for NDPL.
At request of Senior Legal Executive for NDPL, the fact that he
has appeared at this stage is recorded. He is apprised of the order. Put up on
date fixed.
(Ashish Aggarwal)
District Judge-III
North-West District,
Rohini Courts, Delhi
30.07.2025
-- 5 of 5 --