The plaintiffs must prove their entitlement to the properties, and grounds for challenging property transactions must be legally sustainable.

1. The five plaintiffs namely (i) Smt. Sudesh Bala; (ii) Smt. Aadesh; (iii) Smt. Suresh; (iv) Smt. Minakshi; and, (v) Smt. Kamal have instituted the present suit for (a) declaration of the Sale Deed dated 15th September, 2004 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant No.2 in respect of 1/16th share in Khasra No.58 (1-18) and 78/11 (2-0) situated in Extended Laldora of Village Samalkha, Delhi to be null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs; (b) declaration that the Gift Deed dated 10th November, 2006 executed by defendant No.2 in favour of the defendant No.1 in respect of 1/16th share in Khasra No.58 (1-18) and 78/11 (2-0) situated in Extended Laldora of Village Samalkha, Delhi is null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs; (c) declaration of the Sale Deed dated 14th February, 2006 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant No.3 in respect of 1/16th share in Khasra No.58 (1-18) and 78/11 (2-0) situated in Extended Laldora of Village Samalkha, Delhi to be null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs; (d) declaration of the Sale Deed dated 5th May, 2009 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant No.2 with respect to built up property measuring 70 sq. yds. i.e. 6/40 share in Khasra No.78/13/2 min (0-7) and 78/16 (1-9) situated in Extended Laldora of Village Samalkha, Delhi as null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs; (e) declaration of the Sale Deed dated 5th May, 2009 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant No.2 in respect of built-up property measuring 200 sq. yds. i.e. 6/40 share in Khasra No.78/13/2 min (0-7) and 78/16 (1-9) situated in extended Laldora of Village Samalkha, Delhi as null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs; (f) partition of properties shown in red colour in the site plan Annexure A, B & C to the plaint; and, (g) permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the properties.

2. The suit was entertained and vide ex-parte ad-interim order dated 23rd December, 2016, the defendants restrained from creating any third party interest in the properties. The defendants failed to appear inspite of service and their right to file written statement was closed vide order dated 5th May, 2017 and vide order dated 4th July, 2017, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte and the plaintiffs relegated to leading ex-parte evidence and the ex-parte ad-interim order made absolute till the decision of the suit.

3. The plaintiffs, in their ex-parte evidence, besides examining plaintiff No.2 Smt. Aadesh, have examined Naresh, native of Village Samalkha and known to the plaintiffs as PW-2, UDC from the office of Sub-Registrar, Kapashera as PW-3 and an Assistant from National Institute of Open Schooling as PW-4 and closed their ex-parte evidence.

4. It is the case of the plaintiffs in the plaint, (i) that the five plaintiffs are the sisters of the defendant No.1; (ii) that the defendant No.2 Smt. Leela Wati is the wife of defendant No.1 and defendant No.3 Nitin Kumar is the son of defendants No.1&2; (iii) that the defendant No.4 Smt. Chameli Devi is the mother of the plaintiffs and defendant No.1; (iv) that the father of the plaintiffs and the defendant No.1 was the owner of (a) built up house measuring 476 sq. yds. situated in Laldora Abadi Village Samalkha, Delhi; (b) built up house measuring 88 sq. yds. situated in Laldora Abadi of Village Samalkha, Delhi; and, (c) built up house measuring 35 sq. yds. situated in Laldora Abadi of Village Samalkha, Delhi; (v) that the father of the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 died on 2nd January, 1990 and his estate was inherited by the plaintiffs, defendant No.1 and defendant No.4 in equal shares; (vi) that the defendant No.1, in April, 2013, in settlement of the share of the plaintiffs in the father’s estate, gave a built-up house measuring 88 sq. yds. to the plaintiffs with promise to give other properties also to the plaintiffs; (vii) that the defendant No.1 has however thereafter not given