Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

rights over the suit property vide a perpetual lease deed dated 22.07.1958 duly executed by the President of India on behalf of L&DO duly registered consisting of ground floor, first floor and Barsati consisting of room and toilet from the very inception.

2.2 The father of the plaintiff late Sh. Harkishan Lal Bedi during his life time executed a Will dated 06.10.1988. The said Will stipulated that the suit property was equally owned by him and his wife Smt. Sushila Devi Bedi. Further, vide the said Will only life interest of the half share belonging to the plaintiff late father was bequeathed to his wife and it was specifically mentioned that his wife shall have no right of disposal over the said half share during her life time. Thereafter, it was also stipulated in the said Will that after her demise, the said property shall devolve upon his two sons, namely M.M. Bedi (i.e. the plaintiff) and Rabinder Mohan Bedi. The clause 5(d) of the Will executed by Late Sh. H.L. Bedi stipulated as under:-

2.5 Smt. Sushila Devi Bedi, mother of the parties duly executed the registered Will dated 07.04.2000 by virtue of which the suit property was bequeathed to both the plaintiff and defendant no. 3 in equal shares. It was also stipulated in the said Will dated 07.04.2000 as under:

"the aforesaid house property consists roughly of two portions, the ground floor and the first floor. The lawn and the motor garage form a part of the ground floor. The Barsati on the second floor and the servant quarter are considered as part of the first floor. I hereby devise that the said property shall devolve in my two sons Sh. Manmohan Bedi and Sh. Rabinder Mohan Bedi and or their heirs in equal shares, both in respect of the share of property owned by me as well as the share of property left by my late husband Sh. Harkishan Lal Bedi who had also in his Will desired that both the sons should owned half share each in the M.M. Bedi Vs. Madhulika Nath & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:

2.6 The perusal of the said clause clearly stipulated that the Barsati on the second floor i.e. one room constructed therein alongwith the servant quarter on the first floor were considered as a part of the first floor. As such vide the said Will, the suit property was bequeathed in two equal shares to plaintiff and defendant no. 3 and no right, title or interest was given to defendant no. 3 qua the second or any other floor of the suit property. The said Will dated 07.04.2000 also stipulated that any bequeathed not covered by said testament would, however, devolve and vest in both the sons in equal shares absolutely. Smt.Sushila Devi Bedi expired on 25.09.2002 and both plaintiff and defendant no. 3 applied to L&DO for substitution vide substitution letter dated 12.12.2002, the leasehold rights of the suit property were duly substituted in the names of plaintiff and defendant no. 3 jointly and severely on the same terms and conditions as laid down in perpetual lease deed executed on 23.07.1958. The said mutation document dated 12.12.2002 clearly stipulated that the sub- division of the property will not be allowed at any stage highlighting the fiat that partition, if any, as envisaged in the family arrangement dated 24.06.1989 was never or could not be given effect to by the parties.

applied to L&DO for conversion of leasehold rights to freehold rights qua the suit property. That a conveyance deed dated 01.05.2003 was duly executed in the name of the plaintiff and defendant no. 3 clearly stipulating that the suit property had devolved upon them in equal shares. The conveyance deed was duly registered on 12.05.2005. The conveyance deed nowhere stipulated that separate floors belonged to the parties and the entire suit property vested in both the parties in equal share/proportion.