High Court of Delhi
MANMOHAN SINGH
Ike S. Gill
Versus
Govind S. Gill & Another
I.A. No.1082 OF 2012 in CS (OS) No. 2380 OF 2010
Decided on : 18-05-2012
Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 34 - Declaration - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 13 - Judgment passed by foreign Court - Relief of restraining order sought - Regarding registration of any gift-deed with respect to suit property - Plaintiff had apprehension that his younger brother/Defendant No. 1 would try to get control of his mother's property - U.S. Court was already pleased to appoint Def. No. 1 as a guardian of the properties - Said order passed with the consent of Def. No. 2 and not an the basis of judicial determination of the fact that she is an incapacitated person - Further the def. No. 2 categorically stated that the had no desire to give any part of share of the said property to the plaintiff - No reason for disallowing either the defendants or restraining the Registrar from registering such document - Application disposed of with directions.
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
1. By this order, I shall dispose of IA No.1082/2012 filed by the plaintiff seeking temporary restraint order restraining the defendants from seeking/effecting the registration of any gift deed with respect to the suit property or in any manner transferring or creating any rights with respect to the suit property in favour of defendant No. 1 during the pendency of the suit.
2. The brief facts of the case which lead to the filing of the present application are enunciated as under:
a) The plaintiff is the son of defendant No. 2, Smt, Bhagwant Rani Gill (hereinafter referred as Rani Gill). It is stated in the plaint that Rani Gill was married to Air Commodore Padam Singh Gill and out of the said wedlock, the following children were born:
* Shri Govind Singh Gill – Defendant No. 1
* Smt. Sartaj Kaur Gill
* Shri. Ike S. Gill – Plaintiff
b) It is submitted that the defendant No. 2 was the owner of the built up property admeasuring 800 Square Yards bearing No. B-2 West End, New Delhi which is subject matter of the present proceedings. It is stated that after the demise of the Shri Padam Singh, the plaintiff used to take care of his mother and not the defendant No. 1. It is further mentioned in the plaint that the defendant No. 1 is the youngest son and he being a doctor took defendant No. 2 with him for her treatment and regular medical supervision. It is stated that the defendant No. 1 had ulterior motives to appropriate the properties of his mother to his advantage and the same was done on the pretext of taking care of his mother by the defendant No.1.
c) It is averred in the plaint that the defendant No. 1 applied to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Dutechess for appointment of Guardian of Rani Gill. The plaintiff has mentioned about the contents of the application which reveal that the said application contained the averment that Rani Gill is susceptible to undue influence and the petitioner in the said application (defendant No. 1 herein) believes that as a result of this susceptibility, Mrs. Gill has had a significant portion of her assets misappropriated and used for the benefit of others including by and for the benefit of Ikebal S. Gill, her former attorney in fact.
d) It is further stated by the plaintiff that after the consideration of the said application, the US court was pleased to appoint defendant No. 1 as a guardian of the properties of the defendant No. 2. The said guardian was given the following powers:
“a) Marshall her income and assets and establish bank, brokerage and other similar accounts in the name of the Guardian for RANI B. GILL, and endorse, collect, negotiate and deposit all negotiable instruments drawn to the order of RANI B. GILL, including, but not limited, government entitlement checks; invest funds with the same authority as a trustee, pursuant to New York EPTL section 11-2.2; inventory personal belongings, and store or dispose of, as appropriate.
b) Pay such bills as may be reasonably necessary for the maintenance and care of RANI B. GILL.
c) Make gifts, subject to prior Court approval, pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law, Section 81.21(b), except that no prior Court approval shall be required for any gift or gifts to an individual, if the total of all gifts to that individual in the same year does not exceed $500.00, AND the total of all gifts to all individuals in the same year does not exceed the lesser of 5% of all liquid assets in the guardianship estate or $10,000.00.
d) Establish an irrevocable pre-paid funeral trust and submit proof of such trust to the Court.
e) Establish a luxury account in accordance with Medicaid regulations.
f) Establish a separate interest bearing savings account in the guardian’s name, as guardian, entitled “Guardianship Administrative Account”, in the amount of $20,000.00, and denominated in the “Comments” on the bank records “As and for Administrative Costs of the Guardianship Proceeding”, and such separate ac
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.