Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. A suit registered as Suit No.339/1958 titled ‗Munshi & Ors. vs. Onkar Nath Seth & Ors.' was filed seeking partition of the 23 bigha and 10 biswa land comprised in Khasra No.533.

The Gaon Sabha as well as the Central Government were not impleaded as a party in the suit, and the 33 parties either plaintiffs or defendants, but the suit being one for partition, each having the status of a plaintiff as also that of a defendant, entered into a settlement and the learned Civil Judge Sh.C.D.Vasisht, was misled into passing a decree on January 14, 1959, and as per the decree the 23 bigha and 10 biswa land was partitioned by allocating specific shares to the 33 litigating parties. It be highlighted that 3 out of the 33 litigating parties were Ram Chander, Har Chain Singh and Raghunath Singh, the sons of Late Ram Lal.

c. That property at sub-para 2(a) stands partitioned and in respect of properties at paras 2(e) and (f), the brothers have received the compensation individually and separately from the Land Acquisition Collector. That the HUF came to an end prior to September 1981. After all the joint properties had been orally partitioned by metes and bounds and, therefore, thereafter there was no question of rendition of accounts by anyone to each other nor the defendant No.1 was obliged qua any act in relation to the suit properties. Neither the plaintiff nor defendants 2 to 4 have a right, interest or title over the property bearing No.17, Ashok Vihar Community Centre Delhi and all the parties to the suit had executed a registered relinquishment deed dated 16.11.1981 (Ex.D-1) in favour of Hari Singh in respect of the land comprised in Khasra No. 533, Village Wazirpur, Delhi.

45. The decision has not discussed the effect of Gulab Singh filing an affidavit in reply to CM No.5921/1982 in which he categorically deposed that his brother Hari Singh was in exclusive possession of the 688 sq.yd. land since 1959 and was carrying on business therefrom as sole proprietor of M/s.Capital Chemicals. The decision also does not discuss the admissions by Rajbir, Mahesh and Ramesh in the written statement filed by them, and they being prevented from withdrawing the admissions, that at a family partition land ad- measuring 15 bigha and 8 biswa at village Jaibabad U.P. in the names of Gulab, Ramesh and Mahesh stood allotted to Rajbir, Mahesh and Ramesh and the effect of the latter two having sold their one-third share each and hence said part of the property no longer available for being partitioned. Their admission that Hari Singh alone was the owner of Plot No.17, Community Centre, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi has not been taken note of. Pertaining to premium in sum of `3,27,600/- paid by Hari Singh to DDA for acquiring perpetual lease-hold rights with respect to plot No.17, Community Centre, Ashok Vihar and money spent on constructing a building thereon, the learned Single Judge has held that the funds came from HUF, but in what manner? The decision is silent. Admittedly, there is no evidence of the HUF having an income or the funds, except a sum of `80,000/- which the brothers admit was partitioned amongst them. We highlight that in spite thereof the impugned decree embraces even said sum of `80,000/-.

Whereas there is a joint family property bearing Khasra No.533 mesuring 23 bighas and 10 biswas in village Wazirpur, Delhi.
AND WHEARAS the said Khasra No.533 was mutually divided and partitioned between late Ch.Ramchander and other co-owners by virtue of judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit No.339 of 1958 decided by Sh.C.D. Vashisht, Sub Judge, Delhi, and by virtue of the said decree a parcel of land fell to the share of late Ch.Ramchander and his sons arrayed above as First and Second party. AND WHEARAS disputes and litigation ensued between the parties hereto with various Departments because of the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Delhi Development Authority and other Departments.