YOGESH KHANNA, J.

1. IA No.3436/2017 is for seeking directions against the defendant to restrain her from obstructing the ingress and egress to the portion other than mezzanine floor of the suit premises bearing No.50, G.B. Road, Delhi -110006.

However, during the course of arguments, Mr. Harish Malhotra, the learned senior counsel for defendant consented that he has no objection if the prayer made in the plaint is allowed and a preliminary decree for partition be passed declaring the parties to be the owner of 1/3rd share each of properties mentioned in Schedule – I, as amended and as attached to the amended plaint (taken on record while disposing IA No.6427/2017).

2. Admittedly, the plaintiffs and defendant are real sisters being daughters of deceased Brij Mohan Nanda s/o late Lala Shanker Dass Nanda. Brij Mohan Nanda expired on 07.12.2016 at Delhi. Smt. Vimal Nanda, his wife had pre-deceased Brij Mohan Nanda.

3. Brij Mohan Nanda, till his death was doing business in the name of M/s. S.D. Nanda & Sons at Shop No.50, G.B. Road, Delhi – 110006. Brij Mohan Nanda during his lifetime had acquired several movable and immovable properties and had executed his last Will and Testament on 07.06.2006, duly registered with the Office of Sub Registrar of Assurances – I, Delhi vide registration No.2689, Book No.3, Vol.No.611, at page Nos.41-44 on dated 07.06.2006. In his Will, Shri Brij Mohan Nanda had distributed some of his assets which were to go separately to each of his daughter and some of his assets were to be jointly owned by his children. The details are mentioned in his Will dated 07.06.2006. There is no dispute qua the properties going to the shares of each of the daughters independent to each other. The dispute is only qua the properties which fall in joint share.

4. The case of the plaintiffs is the property bearing shop No.50, G.B. Road, Delhi – 110006 bearing MCD Nos.5334 & 5347 (Khasra No.441/173-174) admeasuring 85 square yards is a part of Schedule - I (as amended) of the properties of late Shri Brij Mohan Nanda from where he was running his business in the name of M/s. S.D. Nanda & Sons and had employed several staff. During his lifetime he had also permitted Mr. Kunal Sahgal, son of defendant to use its mezzanine floor, purely on a gratuitous basis, which permissive use came to an end on the death of Brij Mohan Nanda.

5. The plaintiffs further allege that defendant through her son is illegally trying to take over the said property by removing the books of accounts and other articles from the shop without the consent of the plaintiffs and with a sole motive to take its possession, which per Will is bequeathed to all the parties in equal shares.

6. The plaint further talks of a suit pending before the learned Civil Judge for injunction on the allegation that the defendant, through her son, has been trying to remove the furniture etc from the shop and had threatened the employees of M/s. S.D. Nanda and Sons.

7. It is alleged that the sole intention of the defendant is to take over all the properties and to deprive both the plaintiffs of their rightful share. Further it is stated that Sh. Brij Mohan Nanda had only 1/2 share in property bearing No.6/3B, Roop Nagar, Delhi – 110007 admeasuring 642 square yards. The plaintiffs allege that all the parties are in joint possession of the movable and immovable properties as mentioned in Schedule – I, as amended, and such properties need to be partitioned by metes and bound and that the amount shown in the books of accounts of M/s. S.D. Nanda & Sons – have to be utilised for the payment of statutory dues, including that of employees unpaid salaries etc.

8. It is now submitted that both the parties have reached to an oral settlement and do not wish to continue with the disputes and are inclined to maintain harmonious family relations and have thus accepted the Will dated 07.06.2006 as the last Will and Testament of Brij Mohan Nanda and admit that they all acquire 1/3rd each share i