Delhi High Court
Jatin Dhawan vs Pravesh Dhawan And Others on 22 May, 2023
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3652
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 22.05.2023
+ CM(M) 730/2023
JATIN DHAWAN ..... Petitioner
versus
PRAVESH DHAWAN AND OTHERS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Ms. Padma Priya, Advocate along with
Petitioner-in-person.
For the Respondents : None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]
CM APPL. 23043/2023 (for exemption)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 23434/2023 (for delay in refiling)
3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in refiling the
petition.
4. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is
allowed. The delay of 8 days in refiling the present petition is condoned.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:25.05.2023
13:03:53
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3652
5. The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 23044/2023 (for summoning Trial Court Record)
6. This is an application seeks summoning of Trial Court Record.
7. As and when the situation necessitates, the Trial Court Record
may be summoned. As of now, there is no requirement.
8. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 730/2023
9. Petitioner challenges the order dated 21.12.2022 in CS DJ No.
10822/2016 titled as "Rajinder Nath Dhawan & Anr. vs. Pravesh
Dhawan & Ors.", whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the
application under Section 94 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, seeking restrain against defendant No.4 from handing
over the possession of the suit property i.e. the first, second and third
floor of property No. K-38A, Lajpat Nagar-2, New Delhi-24 to the
defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3, who are the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3
herein.
10. Ms. Padma Priya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that it is an admitted case of the parties that by virtue of the
Registered Lease Deed of the year dated 2007, executed by the
petitioner/ plaintiff herein along with respondent No.1, in favour of
respondent No.4/ tenant, the respondent No. 4 was under a contractual
obligation to hand over the possession of the subject suit propery to the
plaintiff.
11. Ms. Priya submits that the same was not done. In fact according
to her, the responendent No.4/ tenant had handed over the possession to
respondent Nos.1 to 3 on 31.01.2014.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:25.05.2023
13:03:53
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3652
12. Despite the fact that an application under Section 94 of the CPC,
1908, was pending before the learned Trial Court for all these years, the
said application was neither considered nor disposed of by the learned
Trial Court.
13. Ms. Priya submits that the application was dismissed cursorily
without looking into the facts which obtained from the consideration of
the learned Trial Court's record.
14. This Court has heard Ms. Priya, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and perused the impugned order as well as the other
documents on record.
15. The fact of the matter is that, though, the application was filed on
28.05.2013 and despite notice having been issued, the respondent No.4
had already vacated the suit property on 31.01.2014 and handed over the
same to respondent Nos.1 to 3 rendering the application itself,
infructuous. Thus, as observed by the learned Trial Court, the relief as
sought in the said application had become otiose.
16. According to Ms. Priya, at the time of filing of the suit, the
respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were not having possession of the subject suit
property.
17. Be that as it may, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
issue as to whether the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were rightly or
wrongly handed over the possession of the subject suit property by the
respondent No.4/ tenant is yet to be decided and shall remain open for
the learned Trial Court to consider during trial as also at the time of final
arguments and cannot be said to have achieved finality, by passing of
the impugned order.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:25.05.2023
13:03:53
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3652
18. With these aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of
without interfereing with the impugned order as such.
19. The petition is diposed of with no order as to costs.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
MAY 22, 2023/nd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:25.05.2023
13:03:53
