GEETA PAL vs BADAMI DEVI AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 03rd July, 2025 + CM(M) 1123/2025, CM APPL. 38082/2025 & CM APPL. 38083/2025 GEETA PAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jyotirmay Vasishtt & Mr. Pushaan Singh Gullia, Advs. versus BADAMI DEVI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by dismissal of her application whereby she sought rejection of the plaint in question. 2. The suit in question is for permanent and mandatory injunction and has been filed by Smt. Badami Devi, who claimed herself to be absolute owner of the property in question which is situated at Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094. 3. Defendant No.1/Yogendra Pal is her real son and defendant No.2/Geeta Pal (petitioner herein) is wife of defendant No.1. 4. According to the averments made in the abovesaid plaint, after the defendants got married, plaintiff provided them with accommodation at the abovesaid house as permissive user. Thus, according to her, there is a relationship of a licensor and licensee between her and the defendants and the suit has been filed with the assertion that despite termination of such licence, they are not vacating the property in question. 5. The rejection was sought on the ground that the learned Trial Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit as it was merely seeking injunction. According to petitioner, in such a situation, the plaintiff should have also sought the relief Signature Not Verified CM(M) 1123/2025 1 Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:05.07.2025 12:35:10 of declaration and possession. 6. This Court has gone through the observations made by learned Trial Court in the impugned order and the learned Trial Court has, rightly, observed that as per the averments