Interim Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS SCJ 824/25
MR SWARUP PAUL
Vs.
MR ATAM PRAKASH TUTEJSA AND ORS
01.08.2025
Present: Applicant in person.
Mr. Harshit Jain, Ld. Counsel for the non applicants
through VC.(Ph. No.: 9899113806)
Mr. Rahul Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the non applicants
in person. (Memo of appearance filed. Taken on
record.)
On perusal of the case file, it is observed that main
suit filed by the applicant / plaintiff is next listed for 24.09.2025
and summons have already been directed to be issued to the non
applicants / defendants. The suit, in essence, is seen to be filed by
the plaintiff to secure protection against illegal dispossession from
the suit property. The non applicants / defendants are the landlord
the the applicant / plaintiff is admittedly their tenant. The present
application has been filed on urgent basis by the applicant /
plaintiff on the ground that the non applicants / defendants have
locked the suit property from inside & outside both resulting in
total denial of access to the applicant / plaintiff to the suit property
where he is a tenant. Applicant’s business goods and merchandise
are stated to be lying unattended inside the locked premises and
continued denial of access is causing irreparable loss / hardship /
financial injury to the applicant / plaintiff. Allegations with
regards unauthorized / suspicious intrusion or attempts in that
regard have also been made in the application alongwith
supporting photographs. Applicant / plaintiff is seen to have made
a police complaint as well on 26.07.2025, but no satisfactory
response was received. Given such a scenario, the applicant /
plaintiff has sought intervention of the Court to pass necessary
pg. no. 1/3
-- 1 of 3 --
directions for getting opened the illegal locks placed by the non
applicants / defendants on the suit property and to ensure that
applicant / plaintiff is not denied free access to his portion till the
time substantive orders are passed as to his eviction by a Court of
competent jurisdiction.
Notice of the above application was issued and Ld.
Counsel has appeared for the non applicants / defendants. Ld.
Counsel states that copy of the application in question alongwith
the photographs has not been received, but nevertheless, upon
instructions, he has the authority to state before the Court that
there are no locks of the non applicants / defendants placed on the
doors of the suit property of the applicant / plaintiff and no
attempts have been made / will be made to illegally dispossess
them or obstruct their access to the portion where they are tenant.
Ld. Counsel also states that locks, if any, at the site of the suit
property do not belong to the non applicants / defendants and may
be appropriately got removed since the non applicants /
defendants have already undertaken civil proceedings before the
Court concerned to evict the applicant / plaintiff from the suit
property by following due process.
In view of the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the
non applicants / defendants, SHO PS Budh Vihar is hereby
directed to depute a proper officer to visit the site of the suit
property (Plot No. 4, First Floor, Pocket 15A, Sector 24, Rohini,
Delhi-110085, admeasuring 3000 sq. ft. approx. – entire portion of
First Floor and a hall on the Second Floor) alongwith the applicant
/ plaintiff and to break open the locks of the suit property, if found
to be present, denying access to the applicant / plaintiff to his
portion. Any other obstruction in the form of locks having been
pg. no. 2/3
-- 2 of 3 --
put elsewhere, at the main gate or other such places from where
the applicant / plaintiff is required to access his portion / suit
property, may also be removed by the police authorities.
Photographs of locks existing and after removal, both be taken
and filed before the Court on NDOH.
The above directions be complied with in letter and
spirit since an occupant cannot be denied access without due
process or compelled to leave area under his occupation by
indirectly making his living at such place so miserable that he has
no option but to leave. In the present case as well, the SHO
concerned to ensure that there is free ingress and egress available
to the applicant / plaintiff into his portion / suit property, till such
time Court of competent jurisdiction passes an order of eviction.
The directions given are equally applicable to the non applicants /
defendants and they must abide by them fully. They are restrained
from putting locks etc. at doors which causes obstruction in free
ingress and egress by the plaintiff / applicant to the suit property,
directly or indirectly. Any non compliance in this regard by the
non applicants / defendants shall be liable to action within the
meaning of Order 39 Rule 2A CPC as directions being passed now
may well be treated as one under under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2
CPC.
Copy of the order be sent to the SHO concerned
without delay.
Copy of this order be given dasti.
Application disposed.
(Gaurav Sharma)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian Judge
North West/Rohini Courts/Delhi
01.08.2025
pg. no. 3/3
-- 3 of 3 --