Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sh. Naval Kishore & Ors vs Sh. Jagdish Chander on 16 November, 2022

                           $~18.
                           *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                           +       RFA 571/2022
                                   SH. NAVAL KISHORE & ORS.                             ..... Appellants
                                                      Through:      Mr. Tara Chand Gupta, Advocate.

                                                      versus

                                   SH. JAGDISH CHANDER                                  ..... Respondent
                                                      Through:

                                   CORAM:
                                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
                                                      ORDER

% 16.11.2022 The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).

C.M. No. 49158/2022

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

C.M. Nos. 49160/2022 (delay in filing)

3. This is an application filed by the appellants seeking condonation of delay of 48 days in filing the appeal.

4. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 48 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

5. The application stands disposed of.

C.M. No. 49161/2022 (delay in re-filing)

6. This is an application filed by the appellants seeking condonation of delay of 13 days in re-filing the appeal.

7. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 13 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

8. The application stands disposed of.

RFA 571/2022 and C.M. No. 49159/2022 (stay)

9. The appellants are challenging the impugned preliminary judgment and decree of partition dated 22.03.2022 passed by the ADJ- 10/Central/THC/Delhi in Sh. Jagdish Chander Versus Sh. Naval Kishore.

10. Vide the impugned judgment, the learned Trial Court held that the respondent is entitled for partition of the suit properties and permanent injunction restraining the appellants from selling, transferring, conveying the suit properties or creating any third party interest in the said properties.

11. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the suit properties were allotted to late Sh. Panna Lal on license basis. Late Sh. Panna Lal, father of the parties, died intestate and hence the appellants and respondent, who were the only legal heirs of late Sh. Panna lal, became co-owners of the properties.

12. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that late Sh. Panna Lal never executed any family settlement for partition of the suit properties as alleged by the respondent. Learned counsel further states that the allotment letters (Ex. PW-2/1 & Ex. PW-2/2) in favour of late Sh. Panna Lal specifically mentions that the suit properties were allotted to the allottee as a licensee. Hence, the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the property which is allotted being a licensee, is not entitled for partition.

13. This matter requires consideration.

14. Issue notice to the respondent through all permissible modes including electronic mode and dasti returnable on 04.05.2023.

15. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned preliminary judgment and decree dated 22.03.2022 shall remain stayed.

GAURANG KANTH, J NOVEMBER 16, 2022 kd Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RITU DHIRANIA Signing Date:18.11.2022 12:16:59