Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Mamta Sehgal vs Chaman Lal Anand & Anr on 19 April, 2022

Author: V. Kameswar Rao

Bench: V. Kameswar Rao

                              $~11
                              *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                              +      RFA 90/2022, CM APPL. 12747/2022

                                     MAMTA SEHGAL                                          ..... Appellant
                                                Through:                  Mr. Saurabh Munjal, Mr. Shreshth
                                                                          Choudhary and Mr. Shiv Sehgal,
                                                                          Advs.

                                                   versus

                                     CHAMAN LAL ANAND & ANR.                               ..... Respondents
                                                 Through:

                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
                                                  ORDER

% 19.04.2022

1. The challenge in this appeal is to a Judgment / Decree dated November 12, 2021 passed in Civil Suit No. 1300/2017 whereby the Trial Court has decreed the suit filed by respondent No.1 herein declaring him as the only owner of the suit property bearing No. 7/157, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi - 110015 and the appellant and respondent No.2 herein have no right, title, claim or interest in the property.

2. It further restrained the appellant and respondent No.2 from claiming any share by inheritance and succession, in the suit property on the basis of sale deed dated May 18, 2011.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Trial Court has erred to hold that the case set out by the respondent No.1 falls within the Exception (iii) of Section 2(9)(A)(b) of the Prohibition of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:21.04.2022 18:00:17 Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988. He states, respondent No.1 herein has failed to establish that the suit property was purchased from his known sources. A mere fact that the amount towards the purchase of the suit property was remitted from the bank account of the respondent No.1 cannot be said to be a proof that the suit property was purchased from his known sources.

4. He also states that the onus of proving that the suit property was purchased from his known sources was on respondent No.1 himself, who has failed to place on record of the Trial Court even one document in that regard.

5. Issue notice to the respondents returnable before Registrar for completion of service on May 31, 2022.

6. After the service is complete, learned Registrar shall place the matter before this Court ensuring that the parties have filed their written submissions along with the Judgments they want to rely on.

7. I have been informed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in possession of the aforesaid property. If that be so, parties herein shall maintain status quo with regard to the title and possession of the property being 7/157, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi - 110015 till the next date of hearing.

8. Soft copy of the Trial Court Record be requisitioned.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J APRIL 19, 2022/jg Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:21.04.2022 18:00:17