RAHUL GARG vs WASIM AHEMAD @ MOHD WASIM & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05th August, 2025 + CM(M) 74/2020 & CM APPL. 2821/2020 RAHUL GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kailash Kumar Sharma, Adv. versus WASIM AHEMAD @ MOHD WASIM & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Santosh & Mr. Noor-ul-islam, Advs. for R-2 & R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is plaintiff before the learned Trial Court and instituted a suit way-back in the year 2013. He was seeking possession, mesne profit and injunction. 2. It seems on two previous occasions, the plaintiff had sought amendment in the suit, which was allowed by learned Trial Court. 3. However, the plaintiff moved another application seeking further amendment in his suit and the grievance is with respect to dismissal of his such last application. 4. The impugned order is dated 14.08.2019. 5. Admittedly, as per the amendment sought by the plaintiff, he, merely, wanted to incorporate one additional prayer in the prayer clause, which reads as under: “to direct the defendant No. 2 & 3 for executing registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff with regard of suit property i.e. House No. 116, area measuring 50 Sq. Yds, situated in Phase-I, Vijay Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 74/2020 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:06.08.2025 16:33:10 Vihar, Delhi-110085 bounded as EAST : other property, West: other property, NORTH : Gali 12 Ft Vide, SOUTH: other property and defendants be directed to hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the aforementioned suit property in favour of plaintiff by way of specific performance.” 6. The case is still at a very nascent stage in the sense that the issues have yet not been framed. 7. The defendants have also filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, wh