Tajinder Singh v. Nirmal Singh & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 03 Feb 2015 · 2015:DHC:1072
Hima Kohli
CS(OS) 1356/2011
2015:DHC:1072
civil appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court decreed a partition suit based on a voluntary settlement agreement supported by a registered will, binding the parties to agreed shares in the disputed property.

Full Text
Translation output
CS(OS) 1356/2011
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CS(OS) 1356/2011
TAJINDER SINGH ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Atul Aggarwal, Advocate
VERSUS
NIRMAL SINGH & ORS ..... Defendants
Through: Mr. Sanad Singhania, Advocate for D-1 with D-1 in person.
Mr. Varun Rathi, Advocate for Mr. Atit Jain, Advocate for D-2 to D-9.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI O R D E R 03.02.2015
JUDGMENT

1. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit against his nine siblings praying inter alia for a decree of partition, declaring him entitled to 1/10th share in the suit premises bearing plot No.40, Khasra No.596 situated in the revenue estate of village Tihar Colony, Fateh Nagar, New Delhi.

2. During the pendency of the present suit, at the joint request of the counsels for the parties, they were referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Pursuant thereto, a Settlement Agreement dated 29.01.2015 has been placed on record. 2015:DHC:1072

3. Counsels for the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and defendants No.2 to 9 state that the terms and conditions of the settlement not only include the suit premises, but some other immovable properties owned by their deceased parents that are situated in Punjab. They point out that the terms and conditions of the settlement have been set out in para 6 of the Settlement Agreement, whereunder it has been agreed that the plaintiff and the defendants No.1 and 3 shall be entitled to 1/3rd share each in the suit premises and the parties have further agreed to the manner of redeveloping/reconstructing the same. In view of a registered will dated 21.04.1995 executed by late Shri Sant Singh, father of the parties, the remaining parties to the suit, i.e., defendants No.2 and 4 to 9 have agreed to relinquish their rights in the suit premises in favour of the plaintiff and the defendants No.1 and

3. Counsels for the parties state that the agreement arrived at between the parties in respect of the other immovable properties situated in Punjab have been set out in para 6(f) of the Settlement Agreement. They jointly state that the Settlement Agreement be taken on record and the suit be decreed in terms thereof.

4. The Court has perused the Settlement Agreement dated 29.01.2015 and the terms and conditions that have been set out in para 6 thereof. The same has been signed by the parties and their respective counsels, apart from the learned Mediator. Enclosed with the Settlement Agreement is a photocopy of a will dated 21.04.1995, executed by late Shri Sant Singh, duly registered on 29.12.1997. The said document has also been signed by all the parties on each page.

5. As the counsels for the plaintiff and the defendants state that they have arrived at the aforesaid settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarters, there appears no legal impediment in accepting the Settlement Agreement.

6. The Settlement Agreement dated 29.01.2015 is taken on record. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived at between them. The suit is decreed while leaving the parties to bear their own costs. HIMA KOHLI, J FEBRUARY 03, 2015 rkb