J U D G M E N T

1. The present Suit has been filed by the original plaintiff, late Sh. Ajit Singh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘plaintiff’), praying for the following reliefs:

“(a) pass a preliminary decree of partition of the property bearing No.3, south end Road, New Delhi, more particularly shown ion the plan, and, thereafter, pass a final decree partitioning the said property by metes and bounds and put each of the parties to the suit in actual physical possession of the portion of the property allotted to him/her. If the partition of the property by metes and bounds is not feasible, then the property may ordered to be sold by public auction through Court and proceeds thereof be divided between the Signature Not Verified CS(OS) 2167/1993 Page 1 of 99 Digitally Signed parties to the suit in accordance with their share and entitlement;

(b) Pass a preliminary decree for partition of the movable assets belonging to the estate of Smt. Abnash Kaur, as mentioned in the Schedule to the plaint and, thereafter, pass a final decree and give to each of the party to the suit his/her share of the said property. In case it is not feasible to distribute the movable assets belonging to the estate of Smt. Abnash Kaur in the hands of defendants Nos.1 & 2 to each of the beneficiaries, as per the share and entitlement, then the said movable assets may be ordered to be sold by public auction through this Hon‟ble Court and the proceeds thereto may be divided amongst the parties, as per their share and entitlement;

(c) Pass a decree for rendition of accounts and enquiry into the same with respect to the rental income of the property received by defendant No.1 from the tenant of property bearing No.3, south End Road, New Delhi, w.e.f. 1.1.1980 to

30.11.1990;

(d) Pass a decree for rendition of accounts and enquiry into the same with respect to the profits made by defendant Nos.1 and 2 from the business which they have been carrying on by investing the funds from the estate of Smt.

Abnash Kaur;

(e) Pass a decree for declaration that there has been no lease deed executed by Smt. Abnash Kaur in favour of Defendant No.1 and that defendant No.1 is not a lessee in the property, 3, South End Road, New Delhi, and she is not entitled to give the said property to any person on sub-lease basis;

(f) Pass a decree of declaration to the effect that defendant No.1 is not a subrogatee of the mortgage deeds executed by late Smt. Abnash Kaur with respect to the property in favour of Smt. Sushila Daphtary and her son Mr. Anil Daphtary said mortgage deeds have been redeemed out of the estate left by Smt. Abnash Kaur Signature Not Verified CS(OS) 2167/1993 Page 2 of 99 Digitally Signed (g) Pass a decree of declaration to the effect that defendants Nos. 1 and 2 have dis-entitled themselves from getting any share in the estate left by Smt. Abnash Kaur and that the plaintiff and defendants Nos.3,4 and 5 are the only beneficiaries under the Will of Smt. Abnash Kaur and are entitled to get the entire estate left by Smt. Abnash Kaur divided and partitioned in four equal shares;

(h) Pass a decree for permanent injunction against Defendant No.1 restraining her permanently from transferring, alienating, letting out or parting with the possession of the property, 3 South End Road, New Delhi, or any part thereof and from making any additions and alterations in the same in any manner whatsoever.

(i) Any relief which this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted to the plaintiff and other beneficiaries under the Will of smt.Abnush Kaur, and (j) Cost of the Suit may also be awarded against defendants Nos.1 and 2.”

2. Once the final hearing of the Suit began and the counsel for the plaintiff had made his submissions, the learned senior counsel for the defendant nos. 1 and 2 pointed out that no submissions had been made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff on some of the prayers, while for some of the prayers, there had been a shift in the