MANOHAR SINGH vs SAVITA TAYAL & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 17th March, 2025 + FAO 84/2023 & CM APPL. 17121/2023 MANOHAR SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.S. Tripathy, Ms. Bharti Tripathi, Mr. G.S. Bagga & Mr. Abhinab Chaudhary, Advs. with appellant-in- person. versus SAVITA TAYAL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Dabas, Mr. Naveen Dalal, Mr. Sandeep Singh Nainwal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA DHARMESH SHARMA, J. (ORAL) 1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”], assailing the impugned order dated 27.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-02, South, Saket Courts, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “trial Court”], whereby his application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC read with Section 151 of the CPC was dismissed for failing the trinity test. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, and shorn of unnecessary details, the appellant/plaintiff has filed a suit seeking a decree of possession concerning property bearing Plot No. 8 (Old Number), now known as D/144-E (New Number), situated in Signature Not Verified FAO 84/2023 Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD Page 1 of 6 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:19.03.2025 11:10:49 Khasra No. 38, in the revenue estate of Neb Saria, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘suit property’]. The appellant/plaintiff claims to be the recorded owner of the suit property, measuring 205 sq. yards, with his name entered as ‘bhoomidar’ in the revenue records, including the khata khatauni and khasra girdwari. It is further asserted that respondent No.1 trespassed into the suit property sometime in the year 2016. 3. During the course o