* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 07th February, 2024 % Pronounced on: 14th May, 2024 + CS(OS) 366/2020 REKHA OBEROI W/o Late Shri Parveen Kumar Oberoi, R/o 2/81, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi-110026 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate.

versus AMIT OBEROI S/o Late Shri Parveen Kumar Oberoi R/o 2/81, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi-110026 ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sanjay Rathi, Ms. Nirmala Rathi, Ms. Jaanvi Rathi & Mr. Deepak Khatri, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

I.A. 1470/2022 (u/Order XII Rule 6 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908)

Historically, human relations have proved to be too frail to withstand Familial scuffle over property rights, even though one of the party is none other than the son, who owes his existence to his mother.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) 366/2020 Page 1 of 22

1. It is an unfortunate case where a mother in her hay days of life, is compelled by the alleged ill treatment at the hands of her own daughter-in- law and son, whom she singlehandedly brought up after having lost her husband at a young age, and to seek peace and security of Home by filing this suit for partition against her son.

2. The facts in brief are that plaintiff, wife of late Shri Parveen Oberoi has filed a suit for partition against Sh. Amit Oberoi, her son (defendant) claiming 50% share in Property No. 2/81, Punjabi Bagh, West, New Delhi, in portion admeasuring 472.22 sq. yards (hereinafter referred to as “suit property”) having inherited the same from the said property from her mother-in-law Smt. Savitri Devi who was the Sole and absolute owner of the Suit property.

3. Smt. Savitri Devi had entered into a Memorandum of Family Settlement dated 13.05.1998 with her two sons, daughter/ Smt. Anu Batra and her husband Sh. Indersain wherein the parties mutually agreed for division of the suit property in the manner described therein. The portion of the property in question, which is defined as the suit property, was agreed to come to the share of Shri Praveen Oberoi, husband of the plaintiff.

4. Shri Parveen Oberoi unfortunately expired on 12.09.2000, leaving behind the plaintiff/wife, defendant/son and one daughter Ms. Pallavi as the legal heirs. Pertinently, Ms. Pallavi has already executed a Relinquishment Deed dated 18.01.2010, relinquishing her share in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant.

5. By way of present application, the applicant/plaintiff seeks Judgment/Decree in her favour on the basis of the admissions.

6. It is submitted in the application that the plaintiff has filed the Suit Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) 366/2020 Page 2 of 22 for Partition, Permanent Injunction and the Rendition of Accounts against her son, the defendant herein in respect of the suit property.

7. It is submitted that the defendant and his wife have been harassing the plaintiff and given beatings to her in her old age for which the plaintiff has made various complaints against him. The apology letter has also been written by the defendant. It is further asserted that the defendant in his Written Statement has taken a contrary stand, but in his affidavit of admission/denial, has admitted the Settlement Deed dated 13.05.1998 executed by the Grandmother in favour of all the family members and also the Relinquishment Deed dated 18.01.2010 executed by Ms. Pallavi/ daughter in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant, therefore, have become entitled to 50% share each in the suit property.

8. On the basis of aforesaid admissions, the plaintiff seeks a decree of partition entitling the plaintiff as well as the defendant to 50% share each in the suit property.

9. The present application has been contested by the defendant by way of his Reply, wherein he has claimed that the present Suit is an endeavour by the plaintiff to grab the suit property as she only has a right to reside but has no legal right, title and interest of any kind