CIVIL CASE FOLLOW - UP REPORT

SUBMITTED TO

SCHOOL OF LAW

STUDENT ADVOCATE VIKAS

KUMAR
FULL NAME- RUHI SAIFI DESIGNATION -
ASSOCIATE
CLASS: BA.LLB DISTRICT COURT
KARKARDOOMA
BATCH: 2012 - 2017

1
 ACKNOWLEDMENT

I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to Mr. Vikas Kumar
for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement throughout the course of
this report. The blessing, help and guidance given by him time to time shall carry me a long way
in the journey of my life on which I am about to embark.

I also take this opportunity to express a deep sense of gratitude for providing his cordial support,
valuable information and guidance, which helped me in completing this task through various
stages.

I am obliged to thank my fellow interns, for the valuable information provided by them. I am
grateful for their cooperation during the period of my report.

Lastly, I thank almighty, my parents, brother, sisters and friends for their constant encouragement
without which this report would not be possible.

2
 CERTIFICATE

Certified that Ms. Ruhi Saifi has successfully completed Case - Follow up (Civil) under my
guidance from 1st August 2016 to 28th February 2017.The intern has taken good interest in this
internship and this learning shall contribute to his success in legal profession.

Court: District Court (Karkardooma) Advocate:

Date:
(Vikas Kumar)

3
 ABSTRACT

The present pending suit is a suit for damages/mesne profits which is caused by the defendant
upon the plaintiff. The present disputes relates to the matter of occupancy also where the
defendant alleges that to be certified holder of the property or herein as the floor which is as far
as by the concerned plaintiff to be frivolous. Also, not only this unwarranted and unnesscery
occupancy by the defendant as caused monetary damages to the plaintiff but also it has caused
great material loss which is so enshrined in the aims and objectives of the plaintiff memorandum
of association.

4
 FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The plaintiff is a Society which is named as ' Munishri Nagrajji Spiritual Centre' which was
duly registered on 22nd January 1985 under the provision of Societies Act, XXI of 1860 and is
presently situated at A - Block, Acharya Nagar Marg, Nirman Vihar, Delhi - 110092.

2. The suit was signed and verified by Mr. Chand Ratan Dassani. By virtue of two Perpetual
Lease Deeds which are executed on 18th January, 1990 and on 19th January, 1990 which was
between The Plaintiff Society and The Delhi Development Society.

3. Both are lessor and lessee respectively in respect of adjoining nazul lands measuring 384.52
sq. mtrs. And 132.06 sq. mtrs. situated at Nirman Vihar, A - Block, Acharya Nagraj Marg, Delhi -
110092, so as herein the plaintiff society has acquired in total as one piece of the land measuring
516.58 sq. mtrs.

4. Construction works of the land was carried out by the plaintiff society majorly of ground floor,
first floor and second floor and also that the plaintiff society is in peaceful possession of the
ground floor, first floor and the terrace of the second floor.

5. as soon as the building was completed various activities, so mentioned in the 'aims and
objectives' under the aegis of the revered Munishri Nagrajii were started for overall upliftment of
the society.

6. It was further provided that Dr. S. Lal, the defendant so mentioned herein is the nephew of the
said revered Munishri Nagrajji was permitted to reside at the said plaintiff society's center and
was also allowed to use up to 4 rooms along with the adjoining open space built on the top floor
as in second floor of the said spiritual center. It was allowed without any rent or any gain of any
kind from the defendant as he was in dire need of a shelter/premises in Delhi.

7. It was provided that no electricity, water charges or any other dues of any kind was ever paid
by the defendant and are borne by the plaintiff society.

5
8. Unfortunately, on 1st April, 2005 revered Munishri Nagrajji died and the defendant alleged
that he would stop using the suit premises, as he was looking for other mode of accommodation,
as soon as he finds one.

9. After that the defendant alleged that he was planning to settle in Jaipur, Rajasthan and was
searching for his residence there. Thereafter the defendant stopped using the said suit premises
however he kept the concerned suit promises locked and key so as to deprive the plaintiff society.

10. It is further provide that due to the unwarranted and unnecessary occupation of four rooms by
the defendant, not only it has deprive those who are in urgent need of shelter but also the plaintiff
society from carrying out its aims and objectives as prescribed in the Memorandum of
Association. 11. As, the four rooms as aforementioned has been locked by the defendant the
same is not available to the plaintiff for any further utilization. The defendant hardly visits the
suit premises once or twice a year for a period not exceeding 5 - 6 days at a stretch and is
permanently residing at Jaipur, Rajasthan along with his family.

12. It is provided that the defendant and his family has enjoyed the use and occupation of the suit
premises absolutely free of any cost, rent, remuneration, damages or contribution of any type to
the plaintiff society while the same space and area in the neighborhood are facing a monthly
rental in the range of Rs. 60,000 - Rs. 70, 000.

13. In tune with the aims and objects of the plaintiff society opened an 'Acharya Manmal
Charitable Diagnostic Centre', May 2012 at the aforesaid property which is serving the people at
large at a very nominal rate (After the name of living disciple of the said Munishri Nagrajji)

14. Seeing the encouraging response of the public beneficiaries of the aforesaid Diagnostic
Centre, the executive committee of the plaintiff society has decided to expand the scope of the
said Diagnostic Centre and to add medical facilities there. For OPDs etc. more space is needed,
be it customized renovation of all the floors have to be carried out for the said purpose. Some of
the machineries have already been purchased and for some more machines/ equipments, the
plaintiff society is in process of issuing purchase orders. So in the circumstances space so
occupied by the defendant is required urgently.

6
15. That by virtue of a resolution passed by the Executive Committees of the plaintiff society on
16th December, 2012 the plaintiff society resolved to have the space occupied by the defendant
vacated and thereafter requested the defendant to vacate the premises in the interest of the
society. That despite for the clear revocation of the license by the society and demand by the
plaintiff society to the defendant to hand over the suit premises to the society the defendant failed
to vacate the premises.

16. Thus, in such circumstances the plaintiff society was constrained to issue a legal notice dated
8th January, 2013 through its counsel by Registered Post Office and Courier (DTDC) calling
upon the defendant to hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises within 15
days from the date of receipt of the notice falling which the defendant would be liable to pay
damage at the rate Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) per day.

17. The registered letter sent at the Delhi address has returned back undelivered and the
registered letter and courier sent to the Jaipur address of the defendant is also unserved as the
defendant has somehow managed to avoid delivery.

18. That the cause of action for filling the present suit has arisen to the plaintiff society and
against the defendant when in December 2012, the plaintiff society revoked the license to the
defendant to use the suit promises free of charge and requested the defendant to vacate the suit
promises and the defendant failed to comply.

19. The cause of action further arose when the plaintiff society sent legal notice dated 8th
January, 2013 by courier and registered post to the defendant and the defendant failed to vacate
the suit premises. The cause of action has arisen on each and every day thereafter as the
defendant is illegally occupying the suit premises. The cause of action also arose on various
dates when the plaintiff society objected to the unauthorized occupation of the endant in the suit
premises.

20. That the cause of action again arose when the defendant deliberately avoided service of the
legal notice dated 8th January, 2013. The cause of action is still continuing and continues to arise
on a day to day basis till the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises is handed over
by defendant to the plaintiff society and the damages for the use and occupation of the suit

7
premises are paid by the defendant to the plaintiff society and the damages for the use of the
occupation of the suit premises are paid by the defendants to the plaintiff society.

21. That the Hon'ble Court has the territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to try and
adjudicate upon the matter as the plaintiff society is Registered in Delhi and the suit premises is
situated in Delhi, entire cause of action also arose at Delhi. That the value of the suit for the
purpose of court fee and jurisdiction for the relief of possession is Rs. 57, 79, 000/- and ad -
valorem court fee of Rs. 2, 31, 160/- as required under the law has been affixed. The plaintiff
society undertakes to pay the court fee for the relief of damage/ mesne profits as and when
quantified and awarded by this Hon'ble Court.

8
 PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant the
following reliefs to the plaintiff society against the defendant:

1. Pass a decree of possession in respect of 4 rooms along with adjoining terrace (open space)
occupied by the defendant on the second floor of the plaintiff society situated at A - Block,
Acharya Nagraj Marg, Nirman Vihar, and Delhi - 110092 more particularly is shown in the
second floor plan.

2. Pass a decree of damages / mesne profits @ Rs. 2000 per day for the 4 rooms along with
adjoining terrace occupied by the defendant on the second floor of the premises of the plaintiff
society situated at A - Block, Acharya Nagraj Marg, Nirman Vihar, New Delhi - 110092 more
particularly shown in the second floor plan, from the date of filling of the suit till the vacant and
physical possession of the suit premises is handed over to the plaintiff society.

3. Interest on prayer at the rate of 18% p.a from the date of the order till the date of payment.
Cost of the suit may also be awarded to the plaintiff society.

4. Any other or further relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of
justice may also be passed to the plaintiff society.

9
 ORDERS

1. DATED: 08. 01. 2015

Science of defendant has been effected by way of publication in daily newspaper Times of India,
published on 28. 08. 2014. But the defendant has not appeared in court nor filed Written
Statement so far defendant is liable to be prosecuted Ex - Parte.

List the matter by the Hon'ble Court on 03. 03. 2015 for further directions.

2. DATED: 03. 03. 2015

The defendant has put in appearance through counsel. He states that he shall file power of
attorney within one week from today. This court notes that the counsel has been served through
substituted means by publication in the newspaper. Written Statement and reply to the
application be filed within 3 weeks with advance copy to the learned counsel for the plaintiff
who may file replication and rejoinder thereto. Parties to file their other documents within two
weeks after exchange of copies.

List before the Joint Registrar for completion of pleadings and denial of documents on 11. 05.
2015.

3. DATED: 11. 05. 2015

Interlocutory Application (I.A) No. 11440/2015 under Order VII Rule 10 R/w Section 151 CPC
moved on behalf of plaintiff for announcing the judgment and the decree in the suit.

Notice of the application be issued to the defendant through counsel. Steps to be taken within
one week for next date of hearing. On receipt of this application, defendant to file reply to this
Interlocutory Application (I.A) within two weeks with copy to plaintiff, who may file rejoinder,
if any within two weeks thereafter.

10
4. DATED: 18. 08. 2015

Interlocutory Application (I.A) No. 8713/2015 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) R/w Section 151 CPC
moved on behalf of defendant for striking out the name of the defendant in the suit.

Neither today nor on last date of hearing is no one present on behalf of defendant.

As per office note, reply to Interlocutory Application (I.A) has already been filed but no rejoinder
to the same has been filed. Hence Right to file rejoinder is closed.

Pleading of this Interlocutory Application (I.A) are complete. At request list before the Hon'ble
court on next date of hearing.

Interlocutory Application (I.A) No. 11440/2015 under Order VII Rule 10 R/w Section 151 CPC
moved on behalf of plaintiff for announcing the judgment and the decree in the suit.

As per office note, defendant has been served with the notice of the application through counsel
but in spite of that neither anyone has appeared on behalf of defendant nor has any reply been
filed. At request, list before the Hon'ble Court on 07. 10. 2015 for further directions.

5. DATED: 07. 10. 2015

Plaintiff has filed a suit praying for a decree of possession. Plaintiff averred that defendant
resides in the second floor but the defendant says that he resides on third floor which is falsely
implicated. Plaintiff says that the structure exist till the second floor and the defendant saying is
baseless and misconceived.

Defendant has occupancy certificate by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). Plaintiff claims
error in the typed version. However, original Occupancy Certificate has not been filed by the
plaintiff.

6. DATED: 09. 02. 2016

In view of notification No. 271871/DHC/ Original - The present matter stands transferred.
Parties are directed to appear before the court of Ld. District Judge Karkardooma Court on 27.07.
2016

11
7. DATED: 27. 07. 2016

Present file has been received from Hon'ble High Court. It will be checked and registered by:

a) Sh. V. Kumar, Ld. - Counsel for plaintiff.

b) Sh. Deepesh Oswal, Ld. - Counsel for defendant.

c) Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has placed his appearance on record. Ld. Counsel for the
defendant has also filed his Vakalatnama on record. Be put up for arguments on all pending
application on 13. 09. 2016.

8. DATED: 13. 09. 2016

Vikas Kumar and Anshul Gupta, Mr. Oswal Seeks adjournment on medical grounds of main
counsel. Plaintiff is directed to put up for arguments on 12. 12. 16.

9. DATED: 08. 10. 2016

The matter could not be listed on 08. 09. 2016 due to holiday and the same was listed by this
Hon'ble Court on the grounds that the main counsel of the defendant was not available and the
plaintiff was directed to file reply of application to bearing Interlocutory Application (I.A) No.
17863 of 2015 U/o VII Rule 11 CPC.

10. DATED: 12. 12. 2016

No Order provided.

12