Divya Kukreja v. Chiranjiv Lal Kukreja

1. This hearing has been done by video conferencing.

2. The present appeal relates to a dispute between father and daughter. The case of the Respondent/father is that he is the owner of the property bearing No. C-2/24, DDA Flats, East of Kailash, New Delhi-110065 (hereinafter, “suit property”). Pursuant to the suit filed by the father against her Ld. Senior Civil Judge, Saket, New Delhi passed judgement and decree, dated 24th July, 2018, directing the Appellant to vacate the suit property. The said judgement has already been upheld by the ld. ADJ, Saket Courts, in RCA No. 101/18, vide judgement dated 9th January, 2019. The present second appeal challenges the said judgement. On 13th March, 2019, the operation of the impugned order has been stayed. Question of law is yet to be framed.

3. Today both the parties have appeared before this Court. The case of the father is that he had gotten his daughter fully educated from Delhi 2020:DHC:2921 University and thereafter, she also completed her Post Graduate Diploma in Business Management. She was initially working with Samsung and thereafter with TATA AIG. The marriage of the daughter was also conducted by him. However, for some reasons, the daughter had a divorce with her husband. She also got alimony at the time of her divorce. Thereafter, she moved into her father’s residence, i.e. the suit property, on 1st March, 2012. Since then, enormous acrimony has arisen between the two parties.

4. On the other hand, the daughter’s case is that the father is an introvert and a simple person and at the behest of their relatives, he had taken the step of filing a suit against her. Further, she states that she currently does not have any source of income, and though she had booked a flat with M/s. Unitech in Gurugram, the possession of the said flat has not been given to the Appellant, due to disputes with M/s. Unitech.

5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, and also the fact that the father is a retired engineer, the daughter, being fully educated and capable of earning a livelihood, ought to pay some user and occupation charges, in the meantime, to the father. Accordingly, it is directed that considering the location of the property and the fact that she is in occupation of one bed room in a 2BHK flat and is also using the common area, kitchen, bathroom, varandah etc., the daughter is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month, with effect from 1st October, 2020, to the father. The said payment shall be made on or before the 10th of every month and shall be remitted directly into the bank account of the father. The details of the bank account of the father shall be furnished by Mr. Katyal, ld. counsel for the Respondent, to Mr. Rahul Gupta, ld. counsel for the Appellant, within a period of two days from today.

6. Further Mr. Rahul Gupta relies upon a judgment passed by a ld. Single Judge of this Court in a bunch of matters, in which the lead matter being RFA 222/2019 titled Ambika Jain v. Ram Prakash Sharma and Anr. This court has been informed that this judgment has been carried in appeal to the Supreme Court where judgement is reserved.

7. It is the stand of the father that Unitech has been asking the daughter to take possession however, the daughter’s stand is to the contrary. Considering the fact that the daughter has been allotted a flat in UNITECH Ltd., notice be issued to M/s. UNITECH Ltd., Block L, South city I, Sector 41, Gurugram, Haryana 122022 Ph: 1800102027[7] (toll free number) returnable on the next date of hearing. The Appellant/daughter to place on record the details of the flat, which has been booked by her, by means of an affidavit, along with all the necessary documents, before the next date of hearing.

8. List this matter for notice to M/s. Unitech, for receipt of the affidavit on their behalf, and for further hearing on 2nd December, 2020. Interim order to continue, subject to the above modifications.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE OCTOBER 1, 2020/dk/Ak