The court ruled that claims of ownership must be substantiated by appropriate legal documentation, reaffirming statutory rights under the Indian Succession Act and its applications to inheritance and property rights.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. These two Appeals have been filed by the Appellant under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1967, against separate orders passed by the learned Single Judge while deciding two separate applications. The first application, filed for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPC’] was dismissed vide order dated 16.01.2018 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order dated 16.01.2018], whereas, the second application, filed under Order XII Rule 1A of the CPC, has been allowed, while permitting the Respondent No.2(iii) to transpose as a plaintiff in the Civil Suit vide order dated 04.01.2024 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order dated 04.01.2024]. The parties to the dispute are common; however, on account of distinct Impugned Orders, this Court deems it appropriate to bifurcate both the Appeals while referring to the parties similarly.

COMMON FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. The common facts leading to filing of the present Appeals and considered relevant for their adjudication, revolve solely around the property bearing no. 13, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit property’].

3. One Late Mr. Lala Narain, who was the lessee of the suit property by virtue of a Perpetual Lease Deed dated 31.05.1932, passed away intestate on 07.11.1950, leaving behind his wife Mrs. Karma Devi, one son Mr. Krishan Dutta and three daughters namely Mrs. Vidyawati, Mrs. Kaushlaya Devi Dhawan and Mrs. Sumitra Sahai. On 06.05.1952, the son, Mr. Krishan Dutta, during the lifetime of his mother, Mrs. Karma Devi (died in 1964), got the entire suit property mutated in his name. Subsequently, Mr. Krishan Dutta vide a Will dated 07.06.1976, executed by him, bequeathed the entire suit property in favour of the Appellant. He passed away in 1976, whereafter his wife, Mrs. Rani Dutta, became the executor of the Will and resultantly applied for Probate/Letters of Administration.

4. All three sisters, through a joint written statement, recorded their no objection to the grant of probate in favour of Mrs. Rani Dutta. Consequently, vide Order dated 08.11.1978, in Probate Case bearing no. 232/1977 filed by Mrs. Rani Dutta, the Court was pleased to grant the Letter of Administration in her favour.

5. Mrs. Rani Dutta passed away on 01.01.1990, pursuant to which, on 18.11.1993, possession of the suit property was handed over to the Appellant. Subsequently, the Appellant issued a notice of eviction to all the occupants of the suit property including the daughter of late Mr. Lala Narain. In response thereto, Late Mrs. Sumitra Sahai, the third sister, instituted a suit seeking mandatory injunction against the Appellant. However, claiming distress on account of her advanced age, she later withdrew the suit, which was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn on 14.12.1998.

6. Thereafter, multiple rounds of litigation were initiated between the parties, however, this Court is of the view that the same are not material for adjudication of the issues raised before it, therefore, are not being deliberated upon, except for the Civil Suit which was filed by the Respondent No.1 [Plaintiff before the learned Single Judge]. Since, two sisters namely Mrs. Vidyawati and Mrs. Kaushalya Devi, had already passed away in 1990, whereas the third sister, Mrs. Sumitra Sahai passed away in 2003, the Civil Suit was initiated by the legal heirs of the three sisters. By way of the Civil Suit, institut