MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. This order shall dispose of applications filed by the plaintiff being IA No.10842/2007 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’ for brevity) and IA No.7820/2008 under Sections 18, 20 and 23 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and IA No.14008/2008 filed by the defendants under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint.

2. The plaintiff filed the suit inter alia, seeking partition and rendition of accounts in respect of properties and assets allegedly belonging to the HUF of Late Sh. Kalp Nath Rai. The plaintiff No.2 is the wife of defendant No. 1 and they were married according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 17th January, 2000. Plaintiff No.1 is the son of plaintiff No.2 and defendant No.1, born on 23rd February, 2001.

3. Allegedly, defendant No.1 has treated the plaintiffs with extreme cruelty, both physical and mental. He has assaulted, abused and tortured the plaintiffs. Plaintiff No.1 is aged about eight years and is in the care and custody of his mother, plaintiff No.2 herein. The plaintiffs have averred that they have the legal right to enjoy their share in all the HUF properties under the control and possession of defendant No.1.

4. During the pendency of the suit, IA No.7820/2008 was filed by the plaintiffs under Sections 18, 20 and 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 read with Section 151 CPC seeking to direct the defendant No.1 to pay interim maintenance of Rs.1.5 lac per month to the plaintiffs and directing him to pay 2/3rd of the rental income received by him to the plaintiffs.

5. The plaintiffs aver that defendant No.1 is a man of means and is earning more than Rs.1 lac per month and leading a luxurious life. The defendant No.1 failed to fulfil his matrimonial obligations. Mr. Kalpnath Rai, father of defendant No.1 had an HUF consisting of himself and defendant No.1. He acquired certain immovable properties from the joint family funds during his lifetime. Mr. Kalpnath Rai expired intestate on 6th August, 1999, thus defendant No.1 became the karta of the said HUF and all the properties constituting the HUF devolved on defendant No.1, the said properties being ancestral joint Hindu properties etc. The plaintiffs claim to be entitled to 1/3rd share each in the joint family properties and the income derived therefrom as per the provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as the properties are in the nature of ancestral joint Hindu properties.

6. Defendant No.2 is the tenant in the property situated at D-4, Upasana Building, Hailey Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi and the defendant No.1 is admittedly getting Rs.63,000/- p.m. as rental income from the said flat. In addition, it is alleged that there are Fixed Deposits of about Rs.6 lac in the name of defendant No.1 in his savings account with the State Bank of India. It is stated in the application that defendant No.1 has received various amounts against agreement of sale of joint HUF properties and has received Rs. 22 lac from one Mr. Vinod Gupta against an agreement to sell dated 23rd May, 2007 for the property at Village Dera Mandi Tehsil, New Delhi. Mr. Vinod Gupta filed a case against the defendant No.1 being Suit No.2006/2007 on the apprehension that he may enter into an agreement/arrangement with some third party. Vide order dated 8th October, 2007 an injunction was passed against the defendant no. 1 in the suit.

7. It is further stated that the defendant No.1 is also receiving an amount of Rs. 3 lac p.a. from the ancestral agricultural land at Semari Jamilpur. The defendant No.1 is enjoying all the amenities and luxuries of life and drives a Maruti Gypsi and Bolero and also recently purchased a Ford Endeavour car.

8. The plaintiffs have allegedly been threatened by the defendant No.1 to the effect that he would sell all the joint family properties and appropriate the entire funds thereof to himself. A public notice was also published on 19th September,