Ram Pal Sharma v. M/S Gopi Nath Pvt Ltd

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. AUGUST 10, 2018 'pp'

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 10th August, 2018 + RSA 110/2018 & CM No.30871/2018 (for stay) RAM PAL SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jagdish Kumar Solanki, Adv. versus GOPI NATH PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment and decree [dated 28th March, 2018 in Civil Appeal No.06/15 (new no.61517/16) (Unique ID No.DLCT01- 002183-2014) of the Court of Additional District Judge-8 (Central)] of dismissal of First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree [dated 31st October, 2014 in Suit No.98/11 (Unique ID No.02401C0192472002) of the Court of Civil Judge- 03, Central] allowing the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff and passing a decree in favour of respondent/plaintiff and against appellant/defendant of mandatory injunction directing appellant/defendant to handover vacant peaceful physical possession of a servant quarter forming part of property no.19/92, Bhaskar Bhavan, West Moti Bagh, Old Rohtak Road, Delhi to the respondent/plaintiff and for permanent injunction restraining the appellant/defendant from parting with possession of the said servant quarter to any other person and for recovery of mesne profits. 2. The appeal came up first before this Court on 3rd August, 2018 when the counsel for the appellant/defendant, after some arguments, sought adjournment. The counsel for the appellant/defendant states that the costs imposed on 3rd August, 2018 have been deposited and the Court Master confirms. 3. The counsel for the appellant/defendant has been heard further and the copies of the entire Trial Court record annexed, perused. 4. The respondent/plaintiff instituted the suit, from which this appeal arises (as per amended plaint dated 23rd March, 2004), pleading (i) that the respondent/plaintiff is the owner of property no.19/92 ad measuring 10,000 sq. mtrs., known as Bhaskar Bhavan, situated at West Moti Bagh, Old Rohtak Road, Delhi; (ii) that the appellant/defendant, sometime in the month of June 1995, approached the respondent/plaintiff in a starving condition and wanted some job and accommodation; (iii) since some of the servant quarters were lying vacant in factory premises aforesaid of respondent/plaintiff, the respondent/plaintiff, considering the pitiable condition of the appellant/defendant, assigned some carpentery work/ furniture repair work etc. to the appellant/ defendant at the factory and at the office premises of the respondent/plaintiff, on daily wages and also granted possessory right to the appellant/defendant of the servant quarter, comprising of only one room, free of costs and purely on temporary basis and on compassionate grounds; (iv) that the appellant/defendant, at the time of being put into possession of the aforesaid servant quarter, assured the respondent/plaintiff that he will vacate the same as and when called upon by the respondent/plaintiff; (v) that the appellant/defendant, since March, 1998, was found indulging in illegal activities inter alia of theft of electricity and of which complaint was made by the respondent/plaintiff; (vi) that the respondent/plaintiff, vide notice dated 17th August, 2000, called upon the appellant/defendant to stop committing theft of electricity in the property of the respondent/plaintiff; (vii) that the appellant/defendant thereafter attempted to encroach on other portions of the property and instituted a suit against the respondent/plaintiff, claiming to be the tenant in the servant quarter under the respondent/plaintiff and seeking to restrain the respondent/plaintiff from forcibly dispossessing the appellant/defendant from the said servant quarter; (viii) the respondent/plaintiff, vide notice dated 2nd February, 2001, terminated the licence of the appellant/defendant and called upon the appellant/defendant to vacate the ser