V.K. Shali, J.

1. This is a suit for partition filed by the plaintiff in respect of Farm Land bearing no. 32, Shivji Marg, Western Greens, Rangpuri, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘suit property’) by metes and bounds in equal shares between the plaintiff and defendant no.1. A decree of declaration declaring the alleged undertaking dated 29.4.2004 given by the plaintiff as null and void ab initio is also prayed for. It is also prayed that a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants jointly and severally from alienating, transferring, selling, conferring or creating any third party interest in the suit property may also be passed.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff & the defendant no.1 are husband and wife and defendants no.2 & 3 are father and mother of the defendant no.1 respectively. The plaintiff and defendant no.1 got married on 13th October 1994, in Delhi. The case of the plaintiff is that sometime in the year 1995-1996 defendant no.1 along with defendant nos.2 and 3 expressed her desire to develop the Suit Property, which they were unable to do on account of paucity of funds.

3. Thereafter, a development agreement was entered into in the year 1996, between the parties to the effect that the plaintiff agreed to incur the cost and expenses for construction and development of the Farm Land and the defendant no.1 agreed that the plaintiff in turn would be vested with an equal undivided share in the suit property.

4. It is further alleged by the plaintiff that in pursuance to the development agreement two independent residential units were constructed on the land in question. Thereafter in the year 2001 plaintiff along with defendant no.1 and their two children moved into one of the residential units and second residential unit was rented out. However, subsequently the relations between plaintiff and defendant no.1 deteriorated on account of temperamental differences. The relations went sour to the extent that the defendant no.1 filed a petition under section 12 of the Protection of women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on 10.10.2007.

5. It is further alleged by the plaintiff that on 12.10.2007, while the plaintiff was in Bali, defendants along with several other persons forcibly entered the suit property and took illegal possession of important documents including the said development agreement & several other things belonging to the plaintiff.

6. On the other hand the defendants have denied all the allegations of the plaintiff and it is alleged by the defendant no.1 that the suit property was purchased by her from her own funds in the year 1989 that is 5 years before solemnization of her marriage with the plaintiff in the year 1994 and the suit property is duly registered in her own name. It is further alleged by her that the plaintiff had no role in the acquisition and construction of the suit property.

7. With regard to the plaint, this court vide order dated 20.3.2009 raised a question as to ‘whether the present suit for relief of partition and possession thereof, in view of the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 is maintainable before this court?” The question was addressed by the parties at length.

8. The contention of the learned counsel for the plaintiff is that though the land/suit property in question was an agricultural land but having regard to the fact that no agricultural activity was ever carried on it and the fact that two independent residential units have been built on it out of which one was used by the plaintiff and the defendant no.1 as their residence and the other was rented out, the suit property has ceased to be an agricultural land therefore it no longer comes within the purview of the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954.

9. However the learned counsel for the defendants has contended that merely because the land has been constructed upon and is being used for residential purposes, it would not cease to fall within