IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SHRI MUNISH MARKAN AT

SAKET, DELHI

SUIT NO. of 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

ABC
…..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

XYZ …DEFENDANTS

INDEX

S.No. Description Pages

1. Memo of Parties

2. Suit for Mandatory Injunction for demolition of

illegal structure.
3. AFFADAVIT

4. Annexure_P1
Sale deed date 8th September 2005 executed in the
favor of defendant no.1, Sale deed dated 13th March
1997 of previous owners.
5. Annexure_P2
Photographs of wooden completed structure and an
incomplete structure as on June 2015.
6. ANNEXURE_P3
Photographs of blocked access on terrace as on June
2015
7. ANNEXURE_P4
Proof of denial by IGL to grant gas connection
8. ANNEXURE_P5
Photographs of crack in terrace and
other areas,
 9. ANNEXURE_P6
Photographs of water seepage on petitioners
property along with video,
10. ANNEXURE_P7
Copy of the notice by SDMC and broken seal
photographs.
11. ANNEXURE_P8
Photographs of disturbance in peaceful possession
June 2015
12. ANNEXURE_P9
Copy of legal notices sent to defendants dated
26/6/2015
13. ANNEXURE_P10
Photographs on support system of illegal
construction

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SHRI MUNISH MARKAN AT

SAKET, DELHI

SUIT NO. of 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

ABC
…..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

XYZ …DEFENDANTS

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. ABC
S/o, D/o, W/o______
R/o______ ……..Plaintiff

1. XYZ
S/o, D/o, W/o______
R/o___________ ….Defendants

Plaintiff

Through

Nitish Banka/Lakshay Manchanda

(Counsels for the Petitioner)
Office at:______________________

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SHRI MUNISH MARKAN AT

SAKET, DELHI

SUIT NO. of 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

 ABC
…..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

XYZ …
DEFENDANTS

SUIT FOR INJUNCTION AGAINST ILLEGAL STRUCTURE ON KAILASH

COLONY, GREATER KAILASH-1 NEW DELHI-110048

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH

1. That, Plaintiff is an owner of Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 and

residing peacefully in said premises for many years, plaintiff has peaceful

possession of said premises since the year 2004.

2. That, the property Greater Kailash-1 New Delhi 110048 was a plot and the

building was constructed on the said plot by taking necessary approval and

sanction plans from the MCD (Defendant. No 3), the said building was

constructed in the year 1961 and easements rights attached to the said building is

being used by all the occupants thereon.

3. That, defendant no.1 is the owner of Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048, which

is the terrace above the second floor. While plaintiff is the owner of Greater Kailash-1

New Delhi 110048. It is pertinent to mention that defendant no.1 &2 are not the owner

of servant quarters and water tanks and other easement rights like shaft access which is a

part of servant quarters, from which the utilities like water pipelines can be maintained,
 also the drainage system which is being used by the plaintiff and other holders of the

property for many years. The same is an admitted position by defendant no. 1 herself

vide sale deed executed in favour of the said defendants on 8 th September 2005 as also

the previous owners of the said premises who passed on the title to defendant no.1 under

the express stipulated condition that no common passage will be blocked and that

owner/occupants of other units of the said building shall have full right access through

staircase etc. to overhead tanks at all reasonable times to get the overhead tanks repaired

which is expressed by the previous seller and owner vide sale deed dated 13 th , March

1997, 5TH January 2000 which is annexed as ANNEXURE-P1.(COLLY) It is pertinent

to mention that the defendant no. 2 is a builder himself and taking active part in the

construction of defendant no. 1 property.

4. That, sometime in the year 2014 defendant no.1 & 2 started the construction of illegal

wooden structure on the roof above plaintiff property without any approval from

defendant no.3 which is a statutory body to regulate such constructions and gives a

safety certificate and necessary clearances to such constructions and neither NOC from

plaintiff and other occupants of the property was taken. Which is again a stipulated

express condition in the sale deed dated 5 TH January 2000, 13th March 1997, attached as

ANNEXURE_P1, It is pertinent to mention that the construction work is still continuing

on the said premises. Photographs of wooden completed structure and an incomplete

structure as on June 2015 attached as ANNEXURE-P2.

5. That, the said construction is illegal and is in violation all the legal bylaws of

SDMC(defendant no.3.) The said construction is so patently illegal that the petitioner is

not getting easement rights to drainage, tanks, water utilities pipes and other

maintenance utilities along with shaft access from which he could carry out repair and
 maintenance work of said utilities, which are common to all the occupants, and are

situated at the terrace, as on June 2015. Photographs of blocked access attached

ANNEXURE-P3.

6. That, due to the said illegal construction petitioner was denied of piped gas utility

connection from IGL as defendants no.1 & 2, have left no way to make arrangement for

piped gas and hence he was denied the connection from the IGL causing lot of

inconvenience to the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention that petitioner has been

enjoying absolute easement rights over the terrace’s common utilities like drainage, shaft

which is a part of servant area which does not form the part of defendant no.1 & 2

property, and access to water and other utilities pipelines, Defendants on the other hand,

infringed the common easement rights of petitioner leaving no alternate access to the

same. The site map of common area is attached as ANNEXURE_P1(colly), Proof of

denial by IGL to grant gas connection is attached as ANNEXURE-P4.

7. That, petitioner is also not able to access the water tank due to the reason that the access

has been blocked by the defendant no. 1 & 2, due to which the petitioner could not reach

the same. That due to which the petitioner is not able to carry out cleaning of tanks and

the petitioner and family are prone to water borne diseases due to the reason of the

inability to perform cleaning of the tank, as the access has been blocked by the illegal

wooden construction. It is pertinent to mention that these common easements are not part

of defendant no1 & 2 property as it is specifically excluded in the sale deed executed in

favor of defendant’s no.1 at the time of purchase of said property. It is also pertinent to

mention that defendant no. 1 & 2 also encroached the servant area on top of which they

have fixed an additional tank from where water leaks and due to defendant no.1 & 2
 inability to construct adequate drainage arrangements the water seeps into petitioner

property causing considerable damage which is Res ipsa loquitur.

8. That, the illegal wooden construction done by defendant no. 1 & 2 is putting extra load

on the building and terrace, and is putting cracks on the terrace, since defendant no.1 &

2, have not used the beam support and have not taken any approval from an architect or

a structural engineer along with other authorities like SDMC(defendant no.3). The

building is under the danger of collapse due to defendant no.1 & 2, negligent conduct of

constructing illegal wooden construction. Photographs of crack in terrace and other

areas, ANNEXURE-P5.

9. That, due to defendant no.1 & 2 illegal construction the said defendants have blocked the

drainage on the terrace and have not made any adequate arrangement for water drainage

due to which the rain water is getting accumulated on the terrace and is causing heavy

seepage in petitioner property below. The said seepage is in every room below and has

caused lot of damage to the roof and walls of my petitioner property. That due to

negligent construction on the terrace and absence of due care has caused considerable

damage to petitioner property. Photographs of water seepage on petitioners property

along with video, ANNEXURE P6

10. That, in July 2014, the SDMC, defendant no.3 had sealed defendant no. 1 & 2 property

and defendant no.1 & 2 on the other hand removed the seal of SDMC(defendant no.3),

which again is an evidence of said unlawful activities. In breach of SDMC sealing

process defendant no. 1 & 2 broke open the said seal, again contravention to all the legal

authorities .The defendant no.3 had also issued a notice dated 17/7/2014, to the

defendant 2 in the said notice the defendant no.3 declared the said construction as illegal

and given defendant no. 2 , 6 days’ time, after the expiry of prescribed time the structure
 was supposed to be demolished by defendant no.3. Subsequent to the said notice the

property was sealed, but however the demolition was not carried out by defendant no.3.

Copy of the notice by SDMC and broken seal photographs- ANNEXURE P7 (Colly)

11. That, further to this defendant no. 1 & 2, have leased the property to someone who is a

nuisance to petitioner and his family mental peace and sanity as the person to whom the

said defendants have rented the said premises are disturbing the peace and harmony of

the whole building and petitioner, thereby disturbing petitioners peaceful possession

over petitioner property. Photographs of disturbance in peaceful possession

ANNEXURE P8

12. That petitioner on several occasions tried to contact defendant no. 1 & 2 regarding the

removal of the said illegal wooden construction, defendants on the other hand gave false

assurances to perform repairing of petitioner property due to the damage which has been

ensued by said defendant’s illegal construction. Petitioner also protested and asked you

to remove the said illegal construction, you failed to do the same. In furtherance of the

steps taken by the petitioner had also sent a legal notice to the all the defendants, A legal

notice dated 26/06/2015 vide ED675327192IN to Dy commissioner SDMC (defendant

no.3) and vide ED675327161IN to defendants no. 1 & 2, the notice issued to defendant

no.1 & 2 was returned back and was again reissued on 07/07/2015 to the other addresses

of defendant no. 1 & 2, vide ED675337645IN ,ED675337654IN, ED 675337668IN,

that no reply has been received by all the defendants. Copy of legal notices sent to

defendants ANNEXURE P9
 13. That, defendants’ no. 1 & 2 are still doing the construction work of one portion of illegal

wooden construction and petitioner apprehends that the further construction will further

jeopardize the structural safety of the building. It is also pertinent to mention on a strong

windy day defendant’s construction becomes unstable and could collapse, which could

be catastrophic to petitioner and his family and also to the occupants of said illegal

wooden construction. Photographs on support system of illegal construction

ANNEXURE P 10.

14. That, said illegal construction done by defendant no. 1 & 2 and subsequent inaction by

defendant no.3 would cause an irreparable loss and damage to petitioner, as the

structural safety and the life of petitioner and his family is threatened by such illegal

construction.

15. That, balance of convenience is in the favor of petitioner as he is the person who is

suffering due to illegal construction as his walls are getting damage by water seepage

and he is unable to access his own utilities like water tank, shaft, drainage.

16. That, petitioner demands maintenance of status quo, i.e by removing the said illegal

construction only the irreparable damage to the plaintiff will be cured.

17. That, the cause of action arose in the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble forum and the cause of

action is continuous as the defendants are still constructing the property.

18. That, the suit is valued at Rs. 250 for the purposes of court fees and adequate court fee

is attached with the plaint.

PRAYER

That Plaintiff begs and prays for the grant of following reliefs as mentioned below.
 a) To pass a decree of mandatory injunction against defendants to demolish and remove the

illegal construction marked as red on site plan.

b) To, award cost of the suit in favor of plaintiff.

c) Any other relief this Hon’ble court deems fit.

Plaintiff

Verification

Verified at on this day of January 2015, that the contents of para 1-14, suit are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing has been concealed there from, That,
contents of Para 15-18 are legal points and they are believed to be true.

Plaintiff

Through

Nitish Banka/Lakshay Manchanda

(Counsels for the Petitioner)
Office at:______________________
 IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SHRI MUNISH MARKAN AT

SAKET, DELHI

SUIT NO. of 2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

ABC
…..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS

XYZ …
DEFENDANTS

AFFIDAVIT

I, Abc S/o Sh. ______ R/o ______________________ aged ______ years, I do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
 1. I say that I am Petitioner in the above case, thoroughly conversant with the facts and,

the contents of which have not been repeated herein for the sake of brevity may be

read as an integral part of this affidavit.

2. That, contents are true and correct to our knowledge and are drafted by my counsel

under my instructions. I have gone through the averments.

3. That, all the documents which are in power and possession are stated and submitted

before the court and I further reserve the right to amend and supply additional

documents if new facts emerge during the pendency of the suit.

DEPONENT

Verification

Verified at on this day of January 2016 that the contents of the above
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing has been concealed
there from.

DEPONENT