JUDGMENT

Neena Bansal Krishna, J.

1. Plaintiff has sought partition in respect of the property bearing no. F- 3, Vijay Nagar, near Delhi University, Delhi 110009 consisting of two and half Floors on a plot of land measuring 200 sq. yards (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property"), from defendant no. 1 and 2, her brothers.

2. The plaintiff's grandfather late Shri Jai Gopal Gomber, on partition came to India in the year 1947/1948 and purchased the suit property vide the Purchase Agreement dated 02.04.1959 and became the absolute, legal and registered owner of the suit property. A Conveyance Deed was executed in his favour on 31.07.1969.Shri Jai Gopal Gomber along with his two sons namely, Shri Inderjit Gomber and Shri. Surender Pal Gomber resided in the suit property, while his third son, Shri. Hari kishen Gomber lived separately and had no interest in the suit property. Shri. Inderjit Gomber died intestate in March, 1979. A family settlement was arrived at between the legal heirs of Late Shri. Inder Jit Gomber and Shri. Surender Pal Gomber, the uncle of the plaintiff in 1982-1983. As per the terms and conditions of the Settlement, Shri. Surinder Pal Gomber was paid a sum of Rs. 75,000/- out of the funds of late Inderjit Gomber.

3. Sh. Inderjit Singh died and was survived by his wife, Smt. Usha Gomber, daughter Smt. Geeta Tandon/plaintiff and two sons namely Shri. Sunil Gomber/defendant no.1 and Shri. Anil Gomber/defendant no. 2. On the demise of Shri. Inderjit Gomber, the four legal heirs became the co-owners of the suit property with undivided equal share of 25% each in the suit property. The original documents of Title i.e. Conveyance Deed and the relinquishment Deed were kept in the custody of the defendant no.1, being the eldest male member of the family. Smt. Usha Gomber died on 18.06.2012 and her share was divided equally amongst the plaintiff and the two defendants, who became entitled to 1/3rd share each in the undivided property.

4. The plaintiff many a times sought her share from defendants but they refused to give her the lawful share. She wrote an e-mail dated 03.06.2012 requesting for her share, which was replied vide e-mail dated 07.06.2012 and defendant no.1 not only refused to give her share but also threatened to demolish the suit property and for the purpose, the plaintiff believes that the defendants have contacted few builders/ property developers to make the suit property into a four storey building. The plaintiff has thus, filed the present suit for partition and possession of the suit property.

5. The plaintiff had claimed in the plaint that the suit property belonged to her father but admitted in her written submissions that the mother Smt. Usha Gober became the absolute owner of the suit property on the basis of Will executed in her favour by Sh. J.P. Gomber and the property was mutated in her name. The property subsequently was made freehold on 01.10.1997 and registered on 16.01.1998 in the name of Usha Gomber.

6. The defendant no. 1 in his Written Statement took the preliminary objection that that the suit does not disclose any cause of action. The plaintiff got married in 1987 and settled in her matrimonial home. Since then, she has not been in possession of any portion of the suit property. The Court fee had also not been paid in accordance Section 7(IV) (b), Schedule II Article VI of Court Fee Act. Also, the plaintiff has concealed material facts.

7. On merits, he has