S. Ravinder Singh & Ors. v. Davinder Singh

1. The plaintiffs have instituted the present suit seeking the relief of partition of the shop bearing No. 863, Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi – 110006, pleading:

(I) that the three plaintiffs and the defendant are siblings and the children of Late Mr. Amar Singh and Late Mrs. Satya Rani;

(II) that Mr. Amar Singh (father of the parties) died on 09.10.2009 and Mrs. Satya Rani (mother of the parties) also expired on 13.10.2010 leaving behind the parties to this suit as their only legal heirs;

(III) that the suit property was acquired/purchased by Mr. Amar

(IV) that Mr. Amar Singh had left behind a registered Will dated

07.06.2006 superseding/revoking an earlier Will dated 31.03.1998 and by which the suit property had been bequeathed in equal shares to his wife, the three plaintiffs and the defendant;

(V) that after the demise of Mrs. Satya Rani, the property has devolved upon the parties to the present suit in equal proportions, i.e. 1/4th each;

(VI) that the plaintiffs as well as the defendant are in actual physical possession of the first and second floors of the suit property and in constructive possession of the basement and ground floor of the same, which is in the tenancy and occupation of Mr. Bhupinder Singh, who was inducted as a tenant by the father of the parties during his lifetime;

(VII) that the defendant, in contravention of the last Will dated

07.06.2006 of the father of the parties and with a view to defeat the legal entitlement of the plaintiffs in respect of the suit property, is relying upon the earlier Will dated 31.03.1998 in proceedings filed by the tenant Mr. Bhupinder Singh under Section 27 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (seeking permission to deposit rent);

(VIII) that the plaintiffs have time and again approached the defendant with a request to physically partition the suit property by metes and bounds and had last approached the defendant in November 2010 for the said purpose, but to no avail;

(IX) that the plaintiffs in the month of August 2011 received summons of an application filed by the defendant under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the aforesaid petition filed by the tenant Mr. Bhupinder Singh under Section 27 of the Rent Control Act and in which the defendant had again claimed that in light of the Will dated 31.03.1998 of the father of the parties, the property stood devolved upon him alone to the exclusion of all other legal heirs, and to which the plaintiffs have furnished a reply refuting the contents thereof;

(X) that the aforesaid conduct of the defendant demonstrates his lack of intention to accede to the lawful requests of partition made by the plaintiffs from time to time; and

(XI) that the defendant has even threatened to sell and create third party interest in respect of the suit property by placing reliance on the Will dated 31.03.1998 and held negotiations with property dealers in this regard.

2. This Court issued summons in the suit to the defendant on 29.11.2011 and directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property. Though the defendant entered appearance through counsel on 19.04.2012 and sought time to file the written statement but remained unrepresented thereafter. Accordingly, the defendant was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 08.11.2012 and the plaintiffs directed to file affidavits by way of evidence. Subsequently, an application was also moved by the tenant Mr. Bhupinder Singh seeking impleadment of himself and MCD as being necessary and proper parties, but the same was withdrawn on 23.09.2013. The suit was thereafter posted for ex-parte hearing for today.