Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: partition of declaration in Govind Kishore Grover vs . Joginder Pal Grover & Anr. on 30 May, 2017Matching Fragments
1 This is a suit for declaration, partition and mandatory injunction. Facts as stated in the plaint are that late Smt. Krishnawanti was stated to be mother of Govind Kishore Grover vs. Joginder Pal Grover & Anr.
the plaintiff and defendant no. 1. She stated to have died on 18.01.2001. The plaintiff states that his mother died without leaving any valid will. It is stated that late Smt. Krishnawanti was a housewife and had no source of income with her. Plaintiff is eldest son in the family and has been running partnership firm under the name and style of "M/s. Northern Steel and General Mills" out of such partnership firm earning, property bearing no. 2754A, Ranjit Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as suit property) was purchased in the name of late Smt. Krishnawanti (mother of the plaintiff and the defendant no. 1), although she did not spend any amount in purchase of suit property. It is stated that father of the plaintiff late Sh. Panna Lal Grover had also died intestate in year 1988 leaving behind the plaintiff, defendant no. 1 and mother of parties late Smt. Krishnawanti.
3. Whether the suit has been valued properly for the purpose of jurisdiction and affixing the court fees? OPD
4. Whether Smt. Krishnawanti was entitled to mortgage the suit proeprty ? OPD
5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the declaration, partition, mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for? OPP
6. Relief.
11 On behalf of the plaintiff, 8witnesses were examined. PW1 is Plaintiff / Govind Kishore Grover, PW2 is Ramesh Kumar Achara UDC from the office of Sub Registrar, Janakj Puri, PW3 is Jai Narain UDC, Office of SubRegistrar, Kashmere Gate, PW4 A.Rehman, UDC, Office of SubRegistrar, Kashmere Gate, PW5 is Ram Rikh, Assistant Director, Registrar of Firms, Kashmere Govind Kishore Grover vs. Joginder Pal Grover & Anr.
13 I have heard counsels for the parties and has gone to the record accordingly, my findings on each of the said issues are as follow: (Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit? ) 15 Plaintiff claims relief of declaration, partition, injunction in respect of property in question which was Govind Kishore Grover vs. Joginder Pal Grover & Anr.
admittedly owned by Late Smt. Krishnawanti(mother of plaintiff). On meaningful reading of the plaint, plaintiff has claimed that documents like Will dated 22.09.1997 in favour of defendant no. 1 and Gift Deed dated 27.01.2001 executed by defendant no. 1 in favour of defendant no. 2 were forged and fabricated as according to plaintiff Late Smt. Krishnawanti though was registered owner of the property but such property was purchased out of the joint funds of the firm. Having considered the evidence and the facts, without going into the sustainability of the claim of the plaintiff, in the facts of the present case at least plaintiff had locus to file the suit being son of Late Smt. Krishnawanti. Accordingly, issue stands decided in favour of the plaintiff.
(Whether Smt. Krishnawanti was entitled to mortgage the suit property ?) and (Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the declaration, partition, Govind Kishore Grover vs. Joginder Pal Grover & Anr.
mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for?) 23 Issue No. 4 and 5 are bing taken up together being interconnected, in the facts of the present case. It is though not disputed, rather matter of record that late Smt. Krishnawanti was registered owner of the suit property by a registered Sale Deed. However, the plea of the plaintiff / Govind Kishore Grover, is that such property was purchased though in the name of his mother/ Late Smt. Krishnawanti but, since, she was a house wife and had not spent anything for purchase of that property, the said property was purchased out of funds of M/s. Northern Steel and General Mills, in which plaintiff was one of the partner.