HARMAN PREET SINGH vs INDERJEET KAUR & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~105 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 11th August, 2025 + CM(M) 1490/2025 & CM APPL. 49142/2025 & CM APPL. 49143/2025 HARMAN PREET SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amarjeet Singh Sahni, Ms. Vanshita Bhuranda, Ms. Muskan Singh and Ms. Simran Panwar, Advocates. versus INDERJEET KAUR & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Puneet Dhawan, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 11.07.2025 whereby his request for impleadment has been declined by learned Civil Judge. 2. The facts of the present case lie in a very narrow compass. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as per their nomenclature in the suit in question. 4. The Plaintiff- Ms. Inderjeet Kaur filed a suit for possession, arrears of rent, injunction and mesne profits against defendant-Ms. Pinkee Singha. 5. The plaintiff claims herself to be the lawful and exclusive owner of the suit property which is situated in Old Mahaveer Nagar, Tilak Nagar and she traces her ownership through a registered gift deed. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1490/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:12.08.2025 18:44:40 6. The suit is being resisted by the concerned defendant who has already been permitted to participate in the suit as her application moved under Order IX Rule 7 CPC has been allowed. 7. It was at the abovesaid stage of the case that the petitioner herein i.e. Mr. Harman Preet Singh filed an application that he be impleaded as defendant in the ongoing suit. 8. According to him, the suit in question has been filed by the plaintiff in collusion with her son and they have suppressed material facts. According to him, the son of the plaintiff had business relation with the applicant