1. By this order, it is proposed to decide IA No.7030/2004 filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC; IA No.8157/2004 filed by the defendant No.1 under Section 151 CPC for clarification of the order dated 15.10.2004; IA 3857/2005 for preponement of the date of hearing (it having become infructuous); IA No. 4671/2005 under Section 151 CPC filed by the defendant no.1 for renewal of the lease deed; IA No. 4702/2007 filed by Defendant no.1 for release of the rent and IA No. 8753/2008 U/O XL Rule 1 filed by the plaintiffs.

2. The aforesaid interim applications arise out of the suit for declaration, injunction and rendition of accounts filed by the plaintiff Gita Abhyankar against the defendant No.1. The plaint discloses that the plaintiff Gita Abhyankar was the only child of late Mr. Kewal Singh and late Mrs. Shamie Singh. The defendant No.1 is the son of the plaintiff and the brother of the defendant No.2.

3. Mr. Kewal Singh during his lifetime had acquired, apart from various movable assets, three immovable properties, viz., Property No.1/31, Shanti Niketan, New Delhi; Plot No.84, Jacraunda Marg, DLF Qutab Enclave, Gurgaon and a Farm House in Village Carter Puri, District Gurgaon. The plot of land at Shanti Niketan measuring 2000 sq. yds. was purchased by late Mr. Kewal Singh in his own name by virtue of a perpetual lease deed registered in his favour on 24.10.1967.

4. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiffs mother Shamie Singh was most uncomfortable about the fact that the Shanti Niketan property was only in the plaintiffs fathers name and on her repeatedly expressing her anguish in this regard and also with a view to avoid any family dispute or litigation in the future, the plaintiffs parents and the plaintiff entered into extensive discussions between themselves, pursuant whereto, it is stated in the plaint, a family arrangement was finally concluded between the family members in late January, 1969.

5. In the aforesaid background and allegedly in terms of the said family understanding, the plaintiffs father finalised certain documents, being a set of letters as well as an agreement dated 30th July, 1969.

6. A letter dated 10th February, 1969 was written by Mrs. Shamie Singh (since deceased) to the plaintiff Gita Abhyankar asking her to join as a co-owner and to contribute towards the cost of construction by raising a loan from her father.

7. The above letter of Mrs. Shamie Singh led the plaintiff to write to her father by a letter dated 17.02.1969:-

“I should very much like to join mummy as a co-owner, and thereby in a way own, some personal property for myself, this is only possible if you are disposed to help me to procure the requisite finance to enable me to join mummy as a co-owner.”

8. The plaintiffs father Mr. Kewal Singh replied to the aforesaid

letter of the plaintiff by his letter dated 10th March, 1969 stating that he would certainly try to raise the necessary funds and would let her know as soon as he was able to do that.

9. On 26.05.1969, a perpetual sub-lease was executed in the name of Mrs. Shamie Singh, the mother of the plaintiff.

10. By a letter dated 25.07.1969, the father of the plaintiff informed her that he had arranged for the money to be loaned to the plaintiff from his bankers against his life insurance policies and provident fund and that the loan will bear interest @ 8% to be borne by the plaintiff.

11. On 30th July, 1969, a reply was sent by the plaintiff to her father, acknowledging and undertaking to re-pay the amount towards the loan and also executing a pronote for Rs.1,80,000/-in consideration of the loan her father had agreed to advance to her.

12. Thereafter, allegedly an agreement was entered into on 30th July, 1969 between Mrs. Shamie Singh on the one hand and the plaintiff on the other hand, whereby and whereunder it was agreed that Mrs. Shamie Singh (first party) and Ms. Gita Abhyankar (second party) have become co-owners, ever since the 30th July