Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shri Rakesh Kumar Jain vs Shri Vipin Kumar Jain & Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 476 Del

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 476 Del
Judgement Date : 24 January, 2014

Delhi High Court
Shri Rakesh Kumar Jain vs Shri Vipin Kumar Jain & Ors. on 24 January, 2014
Author: G. S. Sistani
$~07.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CS(OS) 170/2007
%                                             Judgment dated 24.01.2014
       SHRI RAKESH KUMAR JAIN                          ..... Plaintiff
                    Through : Mr.S.C. Singhal, Adv. along with
                              plaintiff.

                          versus

       SHRI VIPIN KUMAR JAIN & ORS.               ..... Defendants
                     Through : Mr.Mahesh K. Chaudhary, Adv. for
                               defendants no.1 to 3.
       CORAM:
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI

G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)

1.

Plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition. A preliminary decree has been passed by this Court as far back as on 25.8.2008 holding that plaintiff and defendants no.1 to 3 shall have 1/4 th share, each, in the suit property bearing no.A-55, Arihant Nagar, Main Rohtak Road, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. On 25.8.2008, a Local Commissioner was also appointed to suggest the modes of partition. It was agreed between the parties that the suit property cannot be divided by metes and bounds. Thereafter the matter has been adjourned from time to time to enable the parties to sell the suit property. Meanwhile, as agreed, an application was made to the DDA for conversion of the suit property from lease hold to free hold. Defendants are stated to have signed all the necessary papers. The plaintiff had also agreed to sign the application for conversion. Following order was passed by this Court on 9.10.2013.

"1. The Plaintiff has to sign on the application jointly filed by Defendants 1 to 3 for conversion of the suit property from leasehold to freehold. The Plaintiff is present in Court.

2. A copy of the letter dated 29th July 2013 written by the Delhi Development Authority („DDA‟) to the parties requiring them to appear before the DDA has been furnished to the Plaintiff.

3. The Plaintiff is now directed to appear before the Assistant Director (Co-operative Societies) Delhi Development Authority, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi on 11th November 2013 at 3 pm. He will produce before the Assistant Director (Co-operative Societies) DDA a certified copy of this order. Defendants 1 to 3 will also remain present there on that day.

4. The Plaintiff will be permitted to examine whatever documents are already submitted by Defendants 1 to 3 and he will thereafter sign the documents required to be signed.

5. A copy of this order be sent to the Assistant Director (Cooperative Societies) DDA, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi for compliance.

6. List on 17th December 2013."

2. Counsel for the defendant submits that despite agreeing in court, the plaintiff has not signed the paper in the office of the DDA.

3. Today, learned counsel for the plaintiff, on instructions from the plaintiff, who is present in Court, submits that without prejudice to his rights and contentions, the plaintiff will complete all the formalities for conversion of the suit property from lease hold to free hold.

4. As agreed, the plaintiff shall appear before the Assistant Director (Cooperative Societies) Delhi Development Authority, Vikas Sadan, New

Delhi, on 3.5.2014 and he will produce a certified copy of this order before the Assistant Director, (Cooperative Societies), DDA. It is also agreed that out of Rs.3.00 lakhs, deposited by the defendant with the Registrar General of this Court, Rs.1.00 lakh, together with interest accrued thereon, if any, shall be released in favour of the defendant, through counsel, without any further notice to the plaintiff. Let a decree sheet be drawn accordingly.

5. Parties submit that they will take all steps to get the property converted, sign the Conveyance Deed, sell the property and share the sale proceeds i.e. 25%, each. Accordingly, as prayed, final decree is passed in above terms. In case, the parties are not able to sell the suit property mutually, they will be entitled to seek execution of the decree.

6. Let a copy of this order be sent to Assistant Director, (Cooperative Societies), DDA, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi, for compliance.

G.S.SISTANI, J JANUARY 24, 2014 msr

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter