Dr. MS Alka Agarwal & Anr. v. Shrinarinder Singh Bhandari

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by order dated 05.08.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Cont. Gas(C)509/2021,this appeal has been preferred by the original Respondent.

2. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant(original Respondent). It appears that earlier an application was preferred being C.M.(M) 366/2021 for repairing work of water motor, outdoor AC Unit, Dish Antenna,water proofing etc. In the said application,the learned Single Judge passed an order dated 06.05.2021(Annexure A/1)whereby the repair LPA 242/2021 PageIof[3] 2021:DHC:4496-DB 2^ work was permitted with certain conditions. For ready reference, paragraphs 2to[4] ofthe order dated 06.05.2021 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "2. Though, the learned senior counselfor the respondent nos. 1 and 2, who appears on advance notice objects to the maintainability of the application of the petitioner before the learned Trial Court itself however, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the said respondents, he submits that the said respondents shall get the water motor, outdoor AC unit and dish antenna inspected and repaired, ifso required, at the expense of the petitioner, on their own. This shall be done within a period of three daysfrom today. In case some major work is required, ofcourse this time shallstandextended.

3. In view of the above statement and binding the respondent no. 1 and 2 thereto, nothingfurther survives in thispetition. Thesame is disposedofin terms thereof.

4. It is made clear that the above order is passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions ofthe parties in the Suitpending before the learned Trial Court."

3. It appears from the facts ofthe case that despite the above said repairs being carried out, certain water seepage still existed and,therefore,there is need ofrepairing work to be done,especially regarding leakage ofwater etc. Taking note ofthis fact, the impugned order dated 05.08.2021 (Annexure- A)was passed by the learned Single Judge in Cont. Cas(C)No.509/2021 allowing the repair work with certain conditions.

4. It sometimes happens that the repairing work is not up to the mark and, therefore, further repairing is required. No new directions have been given by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned order.

5. It also appears from the facts of the case that there is civil dispute between the parties to this litigation. The appellant has already instituted Civil Suit No.1061/2019forroofrights ofthe property in question. The said LPA 242/2021 Page2of[3] Civil Suit is pending before the Court oflearned Additional District Judge, Saket Courts,New Delhi.

6. The learned Single Judge taking note of the pending Civil Suit has made it clear in the impugned order that the repairing work will be without prejudice to the rights and contentions ofthe parties to the litigation and will not tantamount to any admission of fact or otherwise on the part of the Appellant. The access ofthe Respondent herein or the defendant in the suit, on the terrace ofthe property in question is only for the purpose ofthe repair work. It has also been made clear in the impugned order that the access to the terrace and repairs will be done only with prior intimation by the respondentto the appellant.

7. In view ofthe aforesaid, we see no reasons to entertain this LPA. The same is accordingly,dismissed along with the pending applications.

CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUST 13,2021 'anb' IT BANSAL