Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 5
CS DJ 5/24
MUKESH @ MUKESH KUMAR
Vs.
MUNDRIKA KUMARI
26.03.2024
Present : Sh. Vikas Chhabra, ld counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Dheeraj Jain, ld counsel for proposed defendant
Yogesh with Yogesh.
Sh. Mukesh Sharma and Sh. Rajesh Kumar
Aggarwal, ld counsels for defendant no. 1 to 3 and
for proposed defendant Kusum.
Sh. Bhishm Singh, ld counsel for defendant no. 4.
SI Pushpender in person on behalf of SHO
Begumpur.
Written statement filed on behalf of defendant no. 5.
In the affidavit filed with the written statement name of the SHO
is not disclosed. SI Pushpender appearing on behalf of SHO
stated that Inspector Rajiv Ranjan is posted as SHO Begum Pur.
Replication to the written statement of defendant no.
1 to 3 alongwith application under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC is filed
on behalf of plaintiff. Copy of the same supplied to the counsel
for the opposite parties. Considering the submissions where the
issues have not been settled so far, the documents being filed by
the plaintiff are taken on record and the application under Order 7
Rule 14 is disposed off accordingly.
Vakalatnamas filed on behalf of proposed defendant
Kusum and Yogesh. Time sought by the proposed defendant to
-- 1 of 3 --
..2..
file the reply to the applications and it is stated that the complete
set of plaint alongwith documents has not been supplied to him.
The same is supplied to the counsel for the proposed defendant
Yogesh through Whatsapp. The counsel for the plaintiff prayed
for disposal of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC
thereby restraining the defendants not to raise any construction at
the suit property.
During the submissions on the same, it is apprised to
the court that as on date only the boundary walls are raised and
no construction is raised in the suit property bearing no. E-13 or
13 A in Khasra No. 103/50 Rajiv Nagar, Delhi. The proposed
defendant Yogesh Kumar is asked about the documents executed
by him qua entire plot measuring 200 sq yards out of Khasra No.
103/50 situated at village and post office Karala abadi known as
Rajiv Nagar and he stated that the property was purchased by his
father in the year 1986 in his name and he has sold the same in
December 2022 to Kusum. He stated that he has not executed any
document qua the title and ownership right in the said plot in the
name of Mukesh Kumar s/o Sh. Bhawar Singh.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
the detailed reply to the application of the plaintiff under Order 1
Rule 10 CPC and under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC be filed by the
proposed defendant Yogesh Kumar and Kusum. Meanwhile
defendant no. 5 SHO Begumpur is directed to make inquiries qua
the ownership of the properties which are built up in the East and
West directions of the disputed plot so that the rival contentions
of the parties qua the ownership may be considered by the court
for disposal of the suit as well as the injunction application
-- 2 of 3 --
..3..
appropriately.
Meanwhile no construction be raised at the disputed
plot without the permission from the authorities concerned.
As prayed put up on 21.05.2024 for reply and
arguments on the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and
further submissions on the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2
CPC.
(SUNIL CHAUDHARY)
ADJ-04, North West,
Rohini Courts, Delhi
26.03.2024
-- 3 of 3 --