Delhi High Court
Krishan Mohan Gupta vs Om Prakash Khandelwal on 5 September, 2017
$~7
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO(OS) 164/2017 and CM No.20058/2017
% Date of decision : 5th September, 2017
KRISHAN MOHAN GUPTA ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. S.C. Singhal, Adv.
versus
OM PRAKASH KHANDELWAL ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. Shekhar Dasi, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
1. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties in this appeal.
2. By way of this appeal, the appellant has laid a challenge to
observations made by the ld. Single Judge in the order dated 13 th
April, 2017 passed in CS(OS)No.82/2017 whereby a preliminary
decree holding that the parties held equal shares in the property
bearing Municipal No.B-248, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New
Delhi, was passed. It has been submitted by Mr. S.C. Singhal, ld.
counsel for the appellant that he has no objection to the order dated
13th of April 2017, to the extent of the preliminary decree or the
appointment of a local commissioner by the court to suggest the
partibility of the property and mode of partition.
3. It is submitted that the appellant has objection to the
observations made by the ld. Single Judge in the order dated 13 th
April, 2017 to the effect that "passing of the preliminary decree will
not disturb the business of the partnership firm". This observation,
which has been objected to by ld. counsel for the appellant, was made
in the context of partnership business being run from the said property
under the name and style of M/s Surya Industrial Corporation, a
partnership firm of the appellant/plaintiff and the wife - Geeta Devi
Khandelwal of the respondent/defendant.
4. It is an admitted position that the suit property was purchased in
the name of the appellant/plaintiff - Shri Krishan Mohan Gupta and
the respondent/defendant - Om Prakash Khandelwal. Apart from this
relationship, Shri Krishan Kumar Gupta had also entered into a
partnership with Geeta Devi Khandelwal wife of Shri Om Prakash
Khandelwal which is running a partnership business in the name and
style of M/s Surya Industrial Corporation from the suit property.
Disputes appear to have arisen between the parties. Resultantly, the
plaintiff instituted CS(OS)No.82/2017 on the original side of this court
seeking partition of the suit property as well as exclusive possession of
his determined share.
5. Apart from the litigation relating to the suit property, it is
submitted by Mr. S.C. Singhal, ld. counsel for the appellant/plaintiff
that his client has already caused a notice for dissolution of the
partnership as well as termination of the tenancy of the partnership
firm in the suit property, to be served upon the respondent/defendant,
as well as his wife Smt. Geeta Devi Khandelwal. It is submitted by
Mr. Singal that on account of the pendency of the suit on the original
side of this court, he has not initiated litigation in respect of the
partnership firm.
6. The position which obtains, therefore, is that in
CS(OS)No.82/2017 only the shareholding of the parties in the suit
property bearing Municipal No.B-248, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-
I, New Delhi stands recognized and established as on date. So far as
the position of the business of the partnership firm is concerned, only
a dissolution notice has been served and status quo has been
maintained.
7. We have put it to ld. counsel for the parties that passing of the
preliminary decree and the final decree after consideration of the
partibility of the suit property by metes and bounds cannot ipso facto
result in eviction of the partnership firm from the suit property. Mr.
S.C. Singhal, ld. counsel for the appellant is not able to dispute the
correctness of this proposition.
8. In view thereof, the observations made by the ld. Single Judge
in the order dated 13th April, 2017 cannot be faulted on any legally
tenable grounds. However, in order to avoid any doubt, it is clarified
that passing of the preliminary decree as well as final decree, after
culmination of the proceedings in accordance with law in
CS(OS)No.82/2017, shall not tantamount to an order of eviction of
M/s Surya Industrial Corporation from the property bearing Municipal
No.B-248, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi.
9. Of course, the pendency of the proceedings in
CS(OS)No.82/2017 cannot and would not come in the way of the
appellant/plaintiff taking any action, as he may be advised, in
accordance with law, so far as the dissolution of the partnership
business and eviction of partnership firm from the said property.
This appeal is disposed of in the above terms. The pending
application also stands disposed of.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
SEPTEMBER 05, 2017
aj
