$~6.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 1171/2012
DEEPA CHIBBA ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. G.B. Sewak and Mr. Sujeet
Singh, Advocates with Mr. Yogesh Chibba,
son of the plaintiff in person.
versus
VANDANA VASHISHT & ORS ..... Defendants
Through: Defendants No.1 and 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 20.04.2015
1. This order is in continuation of the order dated 19.01.2015.
2. On the last date of hearing, as the defendant No.1 was not present, counsel for the plaintiff was directed to give a written intimation of the next date of hearing to the counsel for the defendant No.1.
3. Today, the defendant No.1 is present and is duly identified by Mr.Yogesh Chibba, son of the plaintiff. Though the defendant No.2 was proceeded against ex parte on the last date of hearing, he is present today. It has already been recorded that the defendants No.3, 4 and 6 have filed their written statements, wherein they have stated that they do not have any objection to the suit being decreed in terms CS(OS) 1171/2012 Page 1 of 3 of the prayer made by the plaintiff. This leaves the defendant No.5, who is a permanent resident of Brazil. Despite service being effect on him, the said defendant did not enter appearance and accordingly, he was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 19.01.2015.
4. The defendants No.1 and 2 state that they do not have any objection to the Court accepting the report of the Local Commissioner dated 16.01.2015 wherein, it has been stated that the suit premises cannot be partitioned/demarcated by metes and bounds and it would be appropriate to sell the same so that the sale proceeds can be divided between the parties.
5. It has been enquired from the defendants No.1 and 2 as to whether they would be willing to purchase the shares of the remaining co-owners of the suit premises in terms of the preliminary decree dated 27.10.2014. They state that they are not in a financial position to purchase the shares of the remaining parties and are agreeable to the suit premises being sold so that the parties can get their respective shares from the sale proceeds of the suit premises. As the defendant No.6 has already relinquished her 1/7th share in favour of the remaining parties, each party would be entitled to 1/6th share of the sale proceeds.
6. The parties state that they do not have any objection to the CS(OS) 1171/2012 Page 2 of 3 preliminary decree dated 27.10.2014 being converted into a final decree and the suit being disposed of.
7. A perusal of the order dated 27.10.2014 indicates that there is some ambiguity about declaring the shares of the parties to the suit. It is clarified that the plaintiff and the defendants No.1 to 5 are entitled to 1/6th share each in the suit premises bearing No.B-57, Vivek Vihar, Delhi. The aforesaid decree is passed in view of the statement made by the defendant No.6 that she has relinquished her entire share in the suit premises in favour of her remaining siblings.
8. The aforesaid preliminary decree is converted into a final decree with liberty granted to the parties to take joint measures to dispose of the suit premises and share the sale proceeds to the extent of 1/6 th each.
9. In the event the parties are unable to dispose of the suit premises by joint action, they shall be at liberty to file execution proceedings for giving effect to the final decree.
10. The suit is disposed of alongwith the pending application.
No order as to costs.
HIMA KOHLI, J APRIL 20, 2015 rkb CS(OS) 1171/2012 Page 3 of 3