Full Text
RSA 93/2010
AVTAR SINGH(DECEASED)THROUGH LRS Appellants
Through: Mr.Mukesh Anand,Advocate with Mr.R.C.S Bhadoria,Advocate.
Through: Mr.M.K.Sharma,Advocate with Mr. Narendra Gautam,Advocate and Mr. Manish Tanwar,Advocate.
AVTAR SINGH(DECEASED)TTEROUGH LRS. Appellants
Through: Mr.Mukesh Anand,Advocate with Mr.R.C.S Bhadoria,Advocate.
Through: Mr.M.K.Sharma,Advocate with Mr. Narendra Gautam,Advocate and Mr. Manish Tanwar,Advocate.
07.09.2016 1n Arguments were heard on behalfofthe appellants with respect tomeritsofthemattersinthesetwoRegularSecond Appeals. Afterhearing theargumentson5.9.2016,the matters wereadjournedtotodayinasmuch as parties wanted tomakeanendeavourtosettlethe mattersoutsidetheCouri.
RSA Nos.93/2010& 94/2010 page 1 of4 2016:DHC:9186
(U^ I am happy to note thatthe parties have been rightly advised and assisted by their counsels for bringing this family litigation to an end.
ORDER
2. These appeals are therefore disposed ofas compromised as per the terms stated hereinafter:-
(i) It is agreed that the appellants/plaintiffs who form the legal heirs ofthe branch of late Sh. Ranjit Singh will be half i.e 50% undivided ^ owners of the suit property bearing no.4/123, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi and the legal heirs ofthe branch oflate Sh.Rattan Singh/respondents will be I j the owners ofthe other undivided halfofthe suit property. Therefore,the branches comprising the legal heirs oflate Sh.Ranjit Singh,and who are the appellants herein, and legal heirs ofthe branch oflate Sh. Rattan Singh and who are the respondents herein are held to be equal undivided co-owners of the suit property to the extent of50% each.
(ii) It is also agreed that the parties will make endeavours to sell the
A suit property jointly or get a builder who under a collaboration agreement will reconstruct the property at his own costs and give shares to the parties to the present suit in newly constructed building after keeping his own share ofthe suit property and/orsubjectto such otherterms which the partiesto RSA Nos.93/2010& 94/2010 p^gg2of[4] these appeals may agree with the collaborator/builder. 'UH
(ill) Instead of selling the suit property in the market or to a builder/collaborator, parties can also agree to sell their shares to the other branch who is the owner ofthe other 50% i.e each ofthe legal heirs being the two branches forming the appellants and respondents can sell their respective shares to the other legal heirs/branch and who will then become the sole owner ofthe suit property.
(iv) It is also agreed that the ground floor ofthe suit property is in physical possession ofthe appellants and will continue to remain in physical possession ofthe appellants till the suit property is sold or disposed ofas per the terms ofthe present order. So far as the first floor portion is concerned, the same is in physical possession ofthe respondents/defendants and who will continue to remain in possession ofthe same till the suit property is sold or disposed of in terms ofthe present order. The second floor ofthe suit property is locked and will remain locked till the suit property is sold or disposed of in terms of the present order and this second floor will be deemed to be injointpossession ofboth the branches/parties. Tillthe suitproperty issold,from thefinancial year2016-17, RSA Nos.93/2010& 94/2010,. ^ page3of[4] chargestowards property tax will be equally borne by the parties.
(vi) Whatever amount has been deposited by the appellants in the execution proceedings, will be refunded back to the appellants alongwith accrued interestthereon,ifthe amounthas been putin afixed deposit.
(vii) The present compromise order will be an executable decree and firstly parties will be entitled to sell the suit property or dispose ofthe same in terms ofthe present order within a period oftwo yearsfrom today,failing which the parties can approach for execution of the present compromise decree by filing execution proceedings for sale or disposal ofthe property in terms ofthe present order.
(viii) In terms ofthe present order, L&DO is directed to mutate the suit property in the names ofthe legal heirs oflate Sh.Ranjit Singh and late Sh.Rattan Singh. The suits and appeals are disposed ofas compromised in terms ofthe presentorder,leaving the partiesto beartheirown costs. SEPTEMBER07,2016 VALMIKIJ.MEHTA,J Ne RSANos.93/2010& 94/2010, page4of[4]