Prathiba M. Singh, J.

Cs (OS) 11/2017

1. The Plaintiffs Mrs. Sunita Aggarwal and Mrs. Anju Aggarwal, both daughters of Shri Tej Ram Aggarwal have filed the present suit seeking declaration/cancellation, partition and injunction against their father, Shri Tej Ram Aggarwal (Defendant No. 1), mother Smt. Pushpa Devi (Defendant No. 2) as also their four brothers Shri Ravi Shankar Aggarwal, Shri Vijay Shankar Aggarwal, Shri Shiv Shankar Aggarwal and Shri Prem Shankar Aggarwal who are Defendant Nos. 3 to 6, and a third party purchaser of one of the properties, Smt. Bimla Kumari -Defendant No. 7.

2. The case of the Plaintiffs is that the Plaintiffs, together with their parents and brothers constitute a Hindu Undivided Family which has various assets, which are detailed in the plaint as under:-

"(i) An industrial property built up on an industrial plot of about 2232 sq. yards bearing municipal No. A-12, Lawrence Road, Delhi, purchased in the name of Shri Tej Ram Aggarwal, the Defendant No.1 herein;

(ii) An immovable property at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan standing in the name of Jai Complex Pvt. Ltd., a company held by two shareholders, namely, the Defendant No. 1 herein and Defendant No.4 herein. Not only the shares of the aforesaid company are held by the Defendants No. 1 and 4 herein but the said company has also been under the total control and management of the same. In fact, the said company though registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, is in fact in the nature of Hindu Undivided Family business, which was being carried on in the name of the said company only for the purposes of convenience and administrative reasons;

(iii) An immovable property situated at Kucha Chalan, Naya Bazar, Delhi - 110006 (the true and correct address thereof are known to the Defendants No. 1 to 6 herein; however, the identity of this property is accepted), standing in the names of Defendants No. 3 to 6 or any of them;

(iv) An immovable property situated at Ghaziabad, U.P. (the true and correct address thereof are known to the Defendants No. 1 to 6 herein; however, the identity of this property is accepted), was acquired in the name of the Defendant No. 2 herein.

It is emphasized that the Defendant No. 2 never ever had or has any independent source of income, rather no source of income and has been totally dependent for all purposes on the Plaintiffs, the Defendants No. 1 and the Defendants No. 3 and 6 herein. In fact, the Defendant No. 2 is not even (fully) educated and can hardly put her signatures on any document. Thus, it is manifest that the said property in fact belonged to the Defendant No. l and / or the Hindu Undivided Family as stated later, though acquired in the name of Defendant No.2; and

(v) An immovable property constructed on a plot of land admeasuring about 500 sq. yards forming part of Khasra No. 401 in the Lal Dora Area of Village Qudipur, Delhi, acquired in the names of the Defendants No. 5 and 6 herein."

3. The Plaintiff's case is that the entire family was living in A-12 Lawrence Road, Delhi. The Plaintiffs were married in the 1980s. Though the properties were purchased in the name of the father, mother and brothers, they were meant for the enjoyment and benefit for the entire family. It is their case that sometime after the enactment of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, it was agreed between the parties that all the properties form part of the common hotchpotch.

4. The Plaintiffs came to know that a family settlement dated 14th September, 2009 was executed amongst their father and brothers without involving or including the Plaintiffs. In the said settlement, it was clearly described that the parties therein constituted a joint Hindu family. Since the factum of existence of the Joint Hindu Family was admitted, the Plaintiffs ought not to have been excluded from the settlement and from their legitimate share in t