Suit For Permanent Injunction - Bijender - 9 April 2013

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DISTT.
NEW DELHI, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER,
S/O SH. DAMBAR SINGH,
R/O H.NO.J-10, SHRI RAM J.J. CAMP,
NANAKPURA, NEW DELHI-110021
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1.
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER,
S.P. MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE,
J.L.NEHRU MARG,
NEW DELHI
2.
THE S.H.O.,
P.S. SOUTH CAMPUS,
NEW DELHI
DEFENDANTS
SUIT FOR PERMANENT & MANDATORY INJUNCTION

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.
That
citizen
the plaintiff is the law abiding

of
country
and
residing
with
his
family since 2000 and in possession of Jhuggi

No.CN-767, Near
Dard
Road,
(hereinafter
Delhi Jal Board Store, Mir

Minto
called
Road,
the
suit
New
Delhi,
property)
and
shown in Red colour in the site plan annexed

herewith.
2.
That
the
plaintiff
is
pump
operator
upon a pump situated at Mirdard Road, Minto

Road,
Delhi
Jal
Board
Store,
New
Delhi,
through contractor Sh. Ravi Goel/ defendant

from
17.03.2004
continuously
and
provided
the
the
plaintiff
service
has
upon
the
said pump till filing of the present suit

without any complaint by any one.
3.
That
the
plaintiff
has
received
the
handsome salary from the defendant according

to
the
provided
labour
his
law.
service
The
to
plaintiff
Delhi
Jal
has
Board
through a contractor and the plaintiff also

doing the overtime in respect of which the
plaintiff has also received extra payment for
this extra work throughout the course of the
employment with the defendant. The plaintiff
always
continue
to
work
hard
sincerely and diligently the duty.
honestly,
4.
That
the
contractor
defendant
in
Delhi
is
Jal
the
Board
registered
and
the
defendant No.2 had appointed to the plaintiff

as per the guidelines of the Labour Law.
5.
That on 05.03.2012 at about 12.00 a.m.
the defendant alongwith other gunda elements

namely Sh. Shoib Iqbal, who is called himself
to the M.L.A. and Idrish and Mohttram with
the connivance of local police of P.S. I.P.
Estate, New Delhi. The defendant has given
the threat to the plaintiff to demolish and
dispossession
the
property,
with
plaintiff
and
plaintiff
the
his
from
the
suit
that
the
members
had
statement
family
illegally occupied the Jhuggi and they also

stated that, you vacate the suit property,
otherwise you face the dire consequences.
6.
That
on
22.04.2012
and
29.04.2012
the
defendant along with his gunda elements again

reached the suit property and threatened to
spoil
the
life
of
the
plaintiff
and
his
family members, otherwise you hand over the

peaceful possession of the suit property to
the defendant.
7.
That on 26.04.2012 the plaintiff had also
made a complaint in respect of
the threat
given by the defendant No.2 before the higher

police
official
Police,
S.H.O.
i.e.
of
the
P.S.
Commissioner
I.P.
Estate,
of
and
Chowki Incharge, L.N.J.P. Hospital, New Delhi

and also sent the demand notice under labour
law dated 28.04.2012 to the defendant along
with copy to Lt. Governor of Delhi, Labour
Secretary
etc.
The
said
notice
has
also
served the defendant and the defendant had

given a false and frivolous reply of the said
notice through his counsel Sh. Rahul Sharma,
Advocate,
Chamber
No.E-511,
Karkardooma
Courts, Delhi, by way of Speed Post with the

signed of the defendant.
In this reply the
defendant had admittedly partly the facts of

the legal notice of the plaintiff and partly
denied
with
the
copies
of
legal
notice
the
ulterior
complaint
dated
motives.
dated
The
26.04.2012,
28.04.2012
to
the
defendant and its postal receipts, the reply

dated 11.05.2012 of the legal notice are also
annexed herewith.
8.
That
on
defendant
15.05.2012
came
to
the
at
suit
12.30
p.m.
property
the
along
with his musslemen and started to beating the

plaintiff mercilessly and tried to dispossess
the
plaintiff
thrown
the
from
household
the
suit
articles,
property
but
at
by
the
time the nephew of the plaintiff, his wife

and children are present there at that time
and due to this reason the defendant could
not succeed to achieve his nefarious goal.
9.
That
the
plaintiff
has
no
efficacious
remedy except to file the present suit before

this Honble Court.
10. That the cause of action in favour of the

plaintiff
and
05.03.2012
against
when
the
the
defendant
defendant
on
illegally
terminated the plaintiff from his service and

tried
to
dispossess
the
plaintiff
and
his
family members from the suit property. The

cause of action further arose on 22.04.2012
when
the
defendant
along
with
the
police
official came to the suit property and tried

to
dispossess
property.
the
The
plaintiff
cause
of
from
action
the
suit
arose
on
26.04.2012 when the plaintiff had also made a

complaint in respect of
the threat given by
the
the
defendant
before
higher
police
officials. The cause of action further arosae

when on 28.04.2012 when the plaintiff sent
the
demand
further
notice.
arose
on
The
cause
11.05.2012
of
action
when
the
defendant had sent the reply to the legal

notice dated 28.04.2012.
further
arose
when the
along
on
The cause of action
15.05.2012
at
12.30
p.m.
defendant came to the suit property
with
his
musslemen
and
started
to
beating the plaintiff mercilessly and tried

to
dispossess
property.
the
The
plaintiff
cause
of
from
action
the
is
suit
still
continues and subsists.
11. That the valuation of the suit for the

purpose
of
Rs.130/-
court
for
Injunction
Mandatory
fee
the
and
and
relief
Rs.130/-
Injunction.
for
The
jurisdiction
of
is
Permanent
the
relief
requisite
of
court
fee has been affixed on the plaint.
12. That
the
suit
property
is
situated
at
Delhi and the cause of action has arisen at

Delhi
and
hence
this
Honble
Court
has
jurisdiction to try and entertain the present

suit.
P R A Y E R:
In view of the above and in the interest

of
justice,
under:-
it
is
therefore,
prayed
as
(i) That decree of Permanent Injunction may

kindly
be
plaintiff
thereby
passed
and
in
favour
against
restraining
of
the
the
the
defendant
defendant,
his
assignees, servants, agents etc. from the

dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit
property
i.e.
Delhi
Jal
Minto
Road,
Chuggi
Board
No.CN-767,
Store,
New
Mirdard
Delhi,
and
Near
Road,
further
restrain from interfere in peaceful use

and enjoyment of the suit property
shown in Red
Colour
in
as
Site Plan
attached.
(ii)That decree of Mandatory Injunction may

kindly
be
plaintiff
thereby
passed
and
in
against
restraining
assignees,
use
plaintiff
in
and
the
the
the
servants,
peaceful
favour
suit
Store,
Mirdard
Road,
defendant
his
etc.
for
of
the
property
i.e.
enjoyment
No.CN-767, Near
the
defendant,
agents
Chuggi
of
Delhi Jal
Minto
Road,
Board
New
Delhi, as shown in Red
Colour
in
Site
Plan attached.
(iii)
Cost
of
the
suit
may
kindly
be
awarded in favour of the plaintiff and

against the defendant;
(iv)Any
other
relief,
which
this
Honble
Court deem fit and proper may kindly be

passed
in
favour
of
the
plaintiff
and
against the defendant.
DELHI:
DATED:
PLAINTIFF
.04.2013
THROUGH
(OM PAL SINGH)
ADVOCATE
VERIFICATION:
Verified
at
Delhi
on
this
10th
day
of
April, 2013 that the contents of paras 1 to

___ of the plaint are true and correct to my
knowledge and those of contents of paras __
to ___ of the plaint are true on information
received and believed to be
correct.
Last
para is prayer to this Hon'ble Court.
PLAINTIFF

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
& ANR.
DEFENDANTS
AFFIDAVIT
I,
Bijender,
S/o
Sh.
Dambar
Singh,
R/o
H.No.J-10, Shri Ram J.J. Camp, Nanakpura, New

Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:1.
That
the
deponent
is
the
plaintiff
in
the above noted case and is well conversant

with the facts of the case and competent to
swear this affidavit.
2.
That the contents of the accompanying suit
for permanent & Mandatory Injunction
has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions and

same are true and correct to my knowledge.
The
same may be read as part and parcel of this

affidavit and are not repeated herein for the
sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Delhi on this ___
day of
April, 2013 that the contents of the above
affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge
and belief and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
& ANR.
DEFENDANTS
AFFIDAVIT
I,
Bijender,
S/o
Sh.
Dambar
Singh,
R/o
H.No.J-10, Shri Ram J.J. Camp, Nanakpura, New

Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:1.
That
the
deponent
is
the
plaintiff
in
the above noted case and is well conversant

with the facts of the case and competent to
swear this affidavit.
2.
That
the
contents
of
the
accompanying
application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 R/W

Section 151 CPC has been drafted by my counsel
under my instructions and same are true and
correct to my knowledge.
The same may be read
as part and parcel of this affidavit and are

not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Delhi on this ___
day of
April, 2013 that the contents of the above
affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge
and belief and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

& ANR.
DEFENDANTS
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 & 2
READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.
That the plaintiff has filed the suit for
Permanent
and
Mandatory
Injunction
and
the
contents of the same may be read as part and

parcel of this application and the same are
not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
2.
That
in
case
an
exparte
ad-interim
injunction as prayed for is not granted in

favour
of
the
plaintiff
and
defendant,
the
plaintiff
shall
against
suffer
the
an
irreparable loss and injury, which cannot be

granted compensated in terms of money and the
very purpose of filing the present suit shall

be become infructuous.
3.
That the plaintiff has a good prima facie
case in his favour and the plaintiff
has
every hope to succeed in the same.
4.
That the balance of convenience lies in
favour
of
the
plaintiff
and
against
the
defendant.
P R A Y E R:
In view of the above and in the interest
of justice, it is therefore, prayed that an
exparte ad-interim injunction may kindly be
passed in favour of the plaintiff and against
the
defendant
thereby
restraining
the
defendant, their assignees, servants, agents

etc.
from
the
dispossessing
the
plaintiff
from the suit property i.e. Chuggi No.CN-767,

Near
Delhi
Jal
Board
Store,
Mirdard
Road,
Minto Road, New Delhi, and further restrain

from interfere in peaceful use and enjoyment
of the suit property
and further restrain
from interfere in peaceful use and enjoyment

of
the
Colour
suit
in
property,
as
shown
in
Red
Site Plan, till the disposal of
the present case.
Any
Court
other
deem
fit
relief,
and
which
proper
this
may
Honble
kindly
be
passed in favour of the plaintiff and against

the defendant.
DELHI:
DATED:
PLAINTIFF
.04.2013
THROUGH
(OM PAL SINGH)

ADVOCATE

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

& ANR.
DEFENDANTS
MEMO OF PARTIES
SH. BIJENDER,
S/O SH. DAMBAR SINGH,
R/O H.NO.J-10, SHRI RAM J.J. CAMP,
NANAKPURA, NEW DELHI-110021
PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1.
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER,
S.P. MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE,
J.L.NEHRU MARG,
NEW DELHI
2.
THE S.H.O.,
P.S. SOUTH CAMPUS,
NEW DELHI
DELHI:
DATED:
DEFENDANTS
PLAINTIFF
.04.2013
THROUGH
(OM PAL SINGH)
ADVOCATE

SUIT NO._____________/2013
IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. BIJENDER
VERSUS
PLAINTIFF

& ANR.
DEFENDANTS
I N D E X
S.NO.
01.
PARTICULARS
PAGES
C. FEES
MEMO OF PARTIES
02. SUIT FOR PERMANENT

INJUNCTION WITH
SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT
03. APPLICATION UNDER
ORDER 39 RULES 1 & 2
READ WITH SECTION
151 CPC WITH
SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT
04. ADDRESS FORM
05. LIST OF DOCUMENTS
WITH DOCUMENTS
06. VAKALATNAMA
DELHI:
DATED:
PLAINTIFF
.04.2013
THROUGH
(OM PAL SINGH)
ADVOCATE

Suit For Permanent Injunction - Bijender - 9 April 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Suit For Permanent Injunction - Bijender - 9 April 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Suit For Permanent Injunction - Bijender - 9 April 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DISTT.

NEW DELHI, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

SUIT FOR PERMANENT & MANDATORY INJUNCTION

the plaintiff is the law abiding

family since 2000 and in possession of Jhuggi

Delhi Jal Board Store, Mir

shown in Red colour in the site plan annexed

upon a pump situated at Mirdard Road, Minto

through contractor Sh. Ravi Goel/ defendant

said pump till filing of the present suit

handsome salary from the defendant according

through a contractor and the plaintiff also

sincerely and diligently the duty.

defendant No.2 had appointed to the plaintiff

That on 05.03.2012 at about 12.00 a.m.

the defendant alongwith other gunda elements

illegally occupied the Jhuggi and they also

defendant along with his gunda elements again

family members, otherwise you hand over the

That on 26.04.2012 the plaintiff had also

made a complaint in respect of

given by the defendant No.2 before the higher

Chowki Incharge, L.N.J.P. Hospital, New Delhi

served the defendant and the defendant had

Courts, Delhi, by way of Speed Post with the

In this reply the

defendant had admittedly partly the facts of

defendant and its postal receipts, the reply

with his musslemen and started to beating the

time the nephew of the plaintiff, his wife

remedy except to file the present suit before

10. That the cause of action in favour of the

terminated the plaintiff from his service and

family members from the suit property. The

official came to the suit property and tried

26.04.2012 when the plaintiff had also made a

the threat given by

officials. The cause of action further arosae

defendant had sent the reply to the legal

The cause of action

defendant came to the suit property

beating the plaintiff mercilessly and tried

continues and subsists.

11. That the valuation of the suit for the

fee has been affixed on the plaint.

Delhi and the cause of action has arisen at

jurisdiction to try and entertain the present

In view of the above and in the interest

(i) That decree of Permanent Injunction may

assignees, servants, agents etc. from the

restrain from interfere in peaceful use

(ii)That decree of Mandatory Injunction may

Delhi, as shown in Red

awarded in favour of the plaintiff and

Court deem fit and proper may kindly be

against the defendant.

April, 2013 that the contents of paras 1 to