Monika Arora vs Kamla Arora & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 556 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     CS(OS) 779/2012 and I.A.10925/2013, 5563/2012 and
      10335/2012

                                                 Decided on : 20.01.2015

IN THE MATTER OF:
MONIKA ARORA                                        ..... Plaintiff
                        Through: Mr. Parmal Singh, Advocate

                        versus

KAMLA ARORA & ORS                                   ..... Defendants
                        Through: Mr. L.K. Singh, Advocate for D-1, 2, 3,
                        6 and 8.

CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI


HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral)


1.

The present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff against

defendant No.1 (mother-in-law), defendants No.2 and 3 (brothers-in-

law) and defendants No.4 to 8 (sisters-in-law) praying inter alia for

partitioning the immovable properties mentioned in para 5 of the plaint,

owned by Shri Pritam Lal Arora (father-in-law of the plaintiff, husband of

the defendant No.1 and father of the defendants No.2 to 8) to the extent

of 1/9th share each therein.

2. Counsels for the parties jointly state that prior to the plaintiff

instituting the present suit for partition, the defendant No.1 had filed a

suit for partition in respect of one property owned by late Shri Mukesh

Arora, the deceased husband of the plaintiff, pending before the ADJ,

Karkardooma Courts, registered as Suit No.164/2011. The plaintiff

herein(defendant in the said suit) has filed a written statement therein

stating inter alia that apart from the said property, subject matter of the

suit, there are other properties left by late Shri Pritam Lal Arora as

mentioned in para 5 of the present suit, which should also be partitioned

to the extent of 1/9th share each.

3. The Court is informed that evidence has yet to commence in the

aforecited suit.

4. Counsel for the plaintiff states that he is agreeable to withdrawing

the present suit on the condition that the immovable properties

mentioned in para 5 of the plaint may also be taken into consideration

for the purposes of partition in the aforecited suit and the parties

arrayed as defendants No.2 to 8 herein be impleaded by the defendant

No.1 as co-defendants in the said suit.

5. Counsel for the defendants No.1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 states that the

defendant No.1 (plaintiff in the suit) has questioned the right of the

plaintiff herein to seek partition of the five properties mentioned in para

5 of the plaint filed in this suit on the ground that a Family Settlement

had already been taken place in respect of the said immovable

properties and all the co-owners have given up their right, title and

interest in the said properties in favour of the defendant No.1 herein. He

states that without prejudice to the aforesaid plea, he would not have

any objection to impleading the defendants No.2 to 8 in the aforecited

suit and further, to the plaintiff requesting the trial court to frame

additional issues as may arise on the basis of the written statement filed

by her in the said suit.

6. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the counsels for the

parties and with their consent, the present suit is disposed of alongwith

the pending applications with liberty granted to both sides as recorded

hereinabove.

                                                     (HIMA KOHLI)
JANUARY 20, 2015                                        JUDGE
rkb