Deepa Chibba vs Vandana Vashisht & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 3147 Del

$~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

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

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