Back
High Court Of Delhi
SHANTI DEVI - Appellant
Versus
RAM SWARUP GOELA - Respondent
Decided On : 10/30/1996
PARTITION SUIT - SHARE DETERMINATION - JOINT HINDU FAMILY - INTERPRETATION OF PARTITION DEED - ACCOUNTING OF JOINT FAMILY FUNDS - APPOINTMENT OF LOCAL COMMISSIONER.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiffs filed a suit for partition of property and rendition of accounts relating to the business carried on in the name and style of M/s. Sita Ram Goel and Brothers. The plaintiffs claimed that they and the defendants constituted a Hindu undivided family and that the property was a joint Hindu family property. The defendants denied the claim and stated that the parties were co-owners of the property.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the partition deed executed in 1957 was a registered document signed by the parties to the suit and that it could not be disputed by any of the parties. The court also found that the parties intended to remain joint and were given the properties jointly, but since the husband of the plaintiff No. 1 and the father of plaintiff No. 2 and defendant No. 2 died in the year 1944, they were put together with the defendant No. 1 so that he could look after the widow and the children of his deceased brother and their properties as well.
Issues: 1. What is the share of the parties in property No. 152-D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi? 2. Whether there is any other immovable property which is jointly owned by the parties to the suit? 3. If there is such other joint property, then can the present suit be maintained without including the other property in the scope of the suit? 4. Whether the first plaintiff has no locus standi to file the suit? 5. Whether the suit requires the joining of any other parties as claimed by the defendants? 6. Is the plaintiff entitled to get the accounts of the joint family funds and what orders are necessary in this behalf? 7. To what relief is the plaintiff entitled?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the defendant No. 1 was entitled to half of the share in the suit property whereas the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 were owners of the other half of the suit property. The court also held that the present suit was maintainable without including the properties situated at Murthal within the ambit of the present suit as the shares of the parties in the Murthal properties stood finally determined in a previous litigation.
Final Decision: The court granted a preliminary decree in the present suit declaring the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 jointly as owners of 1/2 share and the defendant No. 1 as owner of the other 1/2 share in the suit property. The court also appointed a Local Commissioner to effect the partition of the properties and put the parties in their respective shares and to go into the accounts of the amount realized by the defendant No. 1 as rent of the properties and distribute the shares of each of the shareholders.
( 1 ) THE present suit has been instituted by the plaintiffs seeking partition of the property bearing No. 152-D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110 007 and for rendition of accounts relating to the business carried on in the name and style of M/s. Sita Ram Goel and Brothers.
( 2 ) THE case of the plaintiffs as pleaded in the plaint is that the plaintiffs and the defendants constituted a Hindu undivided family known as Sita Ram Goel and Brothers and that the said Joint Hindu Family has been carrying on business at 152- D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110 007. The claim of the plaintiffs is based on a Deed of Partition which was executed on 17. 8. 1957. In the plaint, the plaintiffs have claimed that the parties to the present suit have l/4th share each in the aforesaid property being No. 152-D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110007. According to the plaintiffs, after the execution of the deed of partition dated 17. 8. 1957 the defendant No. 1 continued to act as the Karta of the Joint Hindu Family and since he started misusing his position as Karta of the family the present suit has been instituted by the plaintiffs seeking partition of the property. It is stated that the entire property has been in use and occupation of all the coparceners of the properties who are co-owners and having equal shares in the property and that the defendant No. 1 is in use and occupation of one flat on the first floor of the property which is just below the flat which is in use and occupation of the plaintiffs on the second floor of the premises and that the plaintiff has also one Barsati in their possession. Since the said property is a Hindu undivided family property the plaintiffs have a right to seek for partition of the said property by metes and bounds and in fact requested the defendant No. 1 for such a partition. The defendant No. 1 not only refused to make any partition but he has also not given full accounts of the HUF funds and has been manupulating the accounts of the HUF for his personal gains. Accordingly, the present suit has been instituted by the plaintiffs.
( 3 ) THE defendants in their written statement denied the claim of the plaintiffs. It has been stated in the said written statement that the plaintiffs jointly have I /3rd share and that the defendant No. 1 has 2/3rd share in the property. It is categorically denied in the written statement that the parties to the suit validly constituted a Joint Hindu Family and stated that in fact and law the parties to the suit continued to be the joint owners of all the assets of M/s. Sita Ram Goel and Brothers including 152- D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110 007 wherein the defendant No. 1 has one half share and the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 have the other half. It is further stated that the suit for rendition of accounts relating to the assets of M/s. Sita Ram Goel and Brothers is not maintainable and that the rent received from the tenants of the property No. 152- D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi are deposited with business houses and the interest is earned from such deposits. It is further stated that proper and regular accounts in respect of rents received and the interest earned from the deposits are maintained which are regularly inspected by the parties.
( 4 ) ON the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed :
1. What is the share of the parties in property No. 152-D, Kamla Nagar, Delhi? 2. Whether there is any other immovable property which is jointly owned by the parties to the suit? 3. If there is such other joint property, then can the present suit be maintained without including the other property in the scope of the suit? 4. Whether the first plaintiff has no locus standi to file the suit? 5. Whether the suit requires the joining of any other parties as claimed by the defendants? 131 6. Is the plaintiff entitled to get the accounts of the joint family funds and what orders are necessary in this behalf? 7. To what relief is the plaintiff entitled?
( 5 ) THE plaintiffs and the defendants
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
