22.11.

23 DW/ 2
Statement of Sh. Ram Dayal

I am around 73 y/s old. I get married in 1970/71 with one Bindo I was blessed
with 4 children. My first child/son was born in year 1973, second son was born
in year, 1975, 3rd child/son was born in year 1977, and in 1979 my 4% son was
born.

My elder son got married in the year 1994, and my daughter-in-law, after
marriage, came into the suit property. (vol. She left the suit property after 3
days and went to Kalkaji residence). I had purchased the proper bearing no.
91, Rampuri, 3rd floor, Kalkaji, New Delhi. In 1998, we had an electricity
connection in the suit property from the year of allotment, i.e., 1984.

At this stage, the witness is confronted with a copy of sanctions for the new
electricity connection in the suit property dated 07.01.1972, which is hereby
marked as Mark DWZ/P2. Confronting with mark DWZ/PZ is objected to by
counsel for the plaintiff on the ground that the document is produced at a
belated stage and defence to the said document cannot be given at this stage.

Objection is untenable as the said document has been put down to the witness
after giving an answer to the witness, showing contradictions in the evidence of
the witness. Furthermore, during cross-examination, additional documents, with
the permission of the court, can be put to the witness. The document is
permitted to be put to the witness for the purpose of confronting the said
document.

To Mark DWZ/P2, the witness has stated that the document must be a correct
document, and it is only that the allotment of the suit property was done in
1964.
It is correct that the suit property allotted by the government was of the area of
22 sq. yards comprising of one room, kitchen and toilet bathroom.

My 2nd son namely, Kanhaiya, got married in the year 1994, and he is having 3
children, 2 sons and 1 daughter. All his children are unmarried at present. My
3rd son got married in the year 2009. Presently, at my Kalkaji Residence, my
wife namely Rajini, my son namely Ashok, and my granddaughter are residing
with me. In the suit property, presently, my son namely, Kanhaiya is residing
with his family. At this stage, the document, i.e., the status report dated
19.11.19, filed by NDMC/D3, along with the site plan, is Shown to the witness.
The same is now marked as Marked as Mark DWZ/P-1 Colly. Witness after
seeing the same. States that portion Mark A1, A2, A3, and A4 are in my
possession, apart from the original allotted plot. My father purchased Mark A3
& A4 in the year 1972. The electricity connection was not there in Mark A3 &
A4 at the time of purchase and it was only a jhuggi at the point of time. Mark
A3& A4 were only having tin sheds in the year 1972. I do not know whether
Mark A1 & A2 are constructed on a govt. land. (vol. they were constructed by
my father). My Father had expired 16-17 years ago.

I have a ready-made garment shop at Tughlakabad

At this stage, the witness is shown a photograph. Ex, PW1/F colly. Witness,
after seeing the same, states that the said photos belong to the suit property.
(Vol. position mark X1 in Ex. PW1/f colly is lying vacant after the death of
my wife.) Mark X2 of Ex. PW1/F colly is the portion of the backside of Mark
X1.

Portion Mark X3 of Ex. PW1/F colly. Is not my property.

At this stage, the witness is shown mark X4 of Ex. PW1/F Colly. & witness
states that the well shown in mark X4 belongs to wall of mark A1 & Mark
PW2/P1 colly. (States Report dated 19.11.19) Mark X5 if Ex. PW1/F colly does
not belong to my property.

It is correct that the Bhagwan Sahai had demolished his unauthorized

construction, i.e. portions Mark A5 and Mark A6 of Ex. DWZ/P1 colly. My
Father used to do work of ironing clothes & he used to earn Rs. 100/- or Rs
150/- daily in the year of 2004-05.

It is correct that neither I have mentioned in my evidence efficient nor I have

pleased it in my WS, about the fact of purchase of portion Mark A3 & A4 of
Ex. DWZ/P1 colly., by my father. It is wrong to suggest that Mark A3 & A4 of
Ex. DWZ/P1 Colly. Were constructed by me in 2014 & 2018

respectively and it is for the reason I did not mention the same in my WS or in
my evidentiary affidavit. It is further wrong to suggest that Mark A3 & Mark A4
of Ex. DW2/PI colly were never purchased by my father. It is further wrong to
suggest that 1 have deliberately or intentionally not identified the photograph
Mark X3, part of Ex. PW1/F colly. It is further wrong to suggest that I did not
get electricity installed in the allotment year in the suit property. It is further
wrong to suggest that the unauthorized construction on government land was
done by me gradually in the year 2014 & 2018 as my family got extended after
marriage of my all children. It is further wrong to suggest that the electricity
meter was installed in the suit property in the year 1972 for the first time. It is
further wrong to suggest that the suit property was comprised with one room,
one kitchen and toilet- bathroom in the year 1972, and it is for the reason the
sanctioned load of the suit property was 0.3 kv. It is further wrong to suggest
that I am deliberately or intentionally telling lie on oath about the year of
unauthorized constructions in connivance with defendant no.2. It is further
wrong to suggest that I managed the status report dated 14.02.2019 in
connivance with NDMC officials in regard to ongoing construction. It is further
wrong to suggest that the unauthorized construction was never done in the year
1970 and was constructed in 2014 & 2018.

At this stage, witness is shown one photograph, which is today marked as Mark
X4, already part of Ex. PW1/F colly. It is further wrong to suggest that because
the unauthorized construction was done in the year 2014 & 2018, the
photograph today marked as Mark X4, already part of Ex PWI/F colly, is
reflecting the fresh plaster and newly constructed wall of bricks. It is further
wrong to suggest that bricks wall reflecting in Mark X4 of Ex. PW1/F colly was
not in existence in the year 1970.

My father used to pay Rs.15-20/- as an house tax of the suit property. I do not
know whether it was tax amount or rent amount. The property in question was
valued by NDMC official for the purpose of house tax in the year 2007-2008. 1
cannot tell the value assessed by the NDMC official for the purpose of house
tax. I did not give any affidavit in the year 1984 for conveyancing of the suit
property or anything. I cannot recall if my father gave any affidavit or not in the
year 1984 for conveyancing of the suit property. It is correct to suggest that I
have not filed any report of Civil Experts/Engineer to show that the
unauthorized construction is old more than 40 years. wrong to suggest that I am
deposing falsely.

RO & AC (Deep
Devesh)

Senior Civil Judge cum-Rent

Controller

South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi

22.11.2023