Dr. Vikram Kumar Jain vs Dr. Ajay Kumar Jain
2010 Latest Caselaw 2469 Del

15
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                     +    CS(OS).No.202/2007

                                  Date of Decision: 7th May, 2010
%

       DR. VIKRAM KUMAR JAIN               ..... Plaintiff
                     Through : Mr. Akshay Makhija and
                               Mr. Saurabh Seth, Advs.

                     versus

    DR. AJAY KUMAR JAIN                  ..... Defendant
                  Through : Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi and
                             Mr. Vishal Balecha, Advs.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may                YES
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?               YES

3.      Whether the judgment should be                       YES
        reported in the Digest?

                         JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for partition of property

bearing No.D-291, Defence Colony, New Delhi.

2. The suit property bearing No. D-291, Defence Colony,

New Delhi was owned by the father of the parties, Late Dr.

N.S. Jain by virtue of perpetual lease deed dated 29th March,

1985. The suit property was converted from leasehold to

freehold and a conveyance deed dated 4th May, 2000 was

executed by L&DO in favour of Late Dr. N.S. Jain.

3. Late Dr. N.S. Jain died intestate on 5th October, 2002

and was survived by the plaintiff and the defendant. The

wife of Late Dr. N.S. Jain had pre-deceased him.

4. Vide preliminary decree dated 31st August, 2007, the

plaintiff and the defendant were each declared to have one

half undivided share in the suit property and the Local

Commissioner was appointed to suggest the mode of

partition in the suit property.

5. On 19th September, 2007, the Local Commissioner

submitted the report to the effect that the partition of the

suit property in two equal shares by metes and bounds was

not possible and, therefore, the same should be sold and the

sale proceeds be divided equally between the parties. Both

the parties have accepted the said report.

6. The plaintiff as well as the defendant are present in the

Court along with their respective counsels and they submit

that they would be able to jointly sell the suit property and

divide the sale proceeds and this suit be kept for directions

for reporting the sale of the suit property and the receipt of

the sale proceeds by the parties.

7. A final decree of partition is passed ordering and

directing that the property D-291, Defence Colony, New

Delhi, shall be sold jointly by the parties and the sale

proceeds shall be divided equally between them.

8. The ground floor of the suit property is in possession of

the plaintiff whereas the first floor and barsati floor are in

possession of the defendant and his wife.

9. Vide order dated 21st May, 2009 passed by the Division

Bench of this Court in FAO(OS)No.278/2007, it has been

directed that 50% of the defendant's share shall be utilized

to purchase a flat by the defendant in his name but for the

benefit of the defendant's wife and the defendant's wife shall

not be dispossessed from the first floor of the suit property

till an alternative arrangement is made.

10. During the course of hearing of this case on 16th April,

2010, the defendant agreed to acquire a flat/floor in South

Delhi for the residence of defendant's wife of her choice

within the amount stipulated above.

11. In order to ensure the compliance of the directions

passed by the Division Bench of this Court in

FAO(OS)No.278/2007 and the order dated 16th April, 2010, it

is agreed by both the parties present in the Court today that

the defendant's wife shall be involved in the process of sale

of the suit property so that the transparency is maintained in

the sale process. The parties further agree that the

defendant's wife shall be made a confirming party in all the

documents relating to the sale of the suit property. The

defendant's wife is also present in the Court and this

direction is passed with her concurrence.

12. The learned counsel for both the parties submit that the

original conveyance deed dated 4th May, 2000 is with the

defendant's wife. The defendant's wife submits that she has

no objection to allow the inspection of the conveyance deed

to the purchaser and to hand over the original conveyance

deed to the purchaser of the suit property at the time of

execution of the sale deed subject to the parties discharging

their obligations in terms of this order.

13. The suit stands disposed of. The decree sheet be

prepared in terms of final decree.

14. List for directions on 16th July, 2010.

15. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel

for both the parties as well as to defendant's wife under the

signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J

MAY 07, 2010 aj