2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 10960
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH, J
TARUN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
AJAY KUMAR – Respondent
Advocates:
Mr. Rajeev Saxena, Mr. Ishan Shehkar, Mr. Sourabh Raghav, Advs., Ms. Malavika R., Ms. Ekta Sharma, Ms. Purva Dua, Advs., Ms. Neha Tandon Adv. for defendant No. 2., Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Adv. for defendant No. 8
JUDGEMENT
: JASMEET SINGH, J I.A. No. 4643 of 2023
1. This is an application filed on behalf of defendant Nos. 3 and 4 under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC seeking rejection of plaint.
BREIF BACKGROUND
2. In the present plaint, the substantial prayers read as under:-
a) That a decree for declaration may be passed in favour of the Plaintiffs that the purported sale of properties detailed in paras 26 and 32 sold by the Defendants No. 1 to 4 are void and in any case do not bind the interest of the plaintiffs and a decree may also be passed declaring that the properties hereto shown in Schedules belong to H.U.F. b) That it may be further declared that the Plaintiffs are not bound by the said illegal and void transactions and debts raised by Defendant No. 1 from Defendants No. 5 and 6. c) That a decree for partition by metes and bounds of the Joint Hindu Family properties and separate possession be passed in favour of the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs may be given their share as per Mitakshara Hindu Law.
d) That a preliminary decree for rendition of accounts of the various businesses houses, concerns, properties as described and delineated in Schedules "A" and "B" attached above, may be gr
Click Here to Read the rest of this document