2024 Supreme(Online)(Del) 32037
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SH. SUMIT GAHLOT & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
SH. YOGINDER SINGH & ORS. – Respondent
CS(OS)-170/2019
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 25.07.2024 + CS(OS) 170/2019 SH. SUMIT GAHLOT & ORS. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr.Pankaj Vivek and Mr.Himanshu Chugh, Advs.
versus SH. YOGINDER SINGH & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr.S.S. Panwar, Ms.Nivedita Panwar, Mr.Ravi Panwar, and Ms.Punam Singh, Advs. for D-1 (through VC)
Mr.Pankaj Vivek and Mr.Himanshu Chugh, Advs. for D-1 to D-4 in counter claim.
Mr.Sharat Kapoor, Mr.Anirudh Dusaj and Mr.Shubh Kapoor, Advs. for D-2 in suit & D-5 in counter claim. (through VC)
Ms.Sharmistha Choudhury, Adv. for D-2 (through VC)
Mr.R.K. Ruhil, Adv. for D-3 in Suit and for D-6 in counter claim.
Mr.Sharad Malhotra, Adv. for D-9 & D-10 (through VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) I.A. 18397/2019 & CC 21/2019
1. This application has been filed by the plaintiffs, praying for Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) 170/2019 Page 1 of 13 dismissal of the Counter Claim filed by the defendant no.1/Counter Claimant.
2. In this application, the plaintiffs assert that the Counter Claim of the defendant no.1/Counter Claimant is based on the plea of the defendant no.1 being in adverse possession of one of the Suit Properties, that is, residential plot measuring 9 Biswas (450 Sq. Yds.) of Khasra No. 245 of Khata No. 245/247 min., situated in extended Lal Dora of village Mitraon, New Delhi, which is not sustainable in law and, therefore, the Counter Claim is liable to be dismissed.
Factual Background:
3. The captioned Suit has been filed by the plaintiff inter alia praying for a decree of partition of the Suit Properties claiming the same to be the properties of a Hindu Undivided Family (in short, HUF). The plaintiffs assert that the Suit Properties were possessed by the late Sh. Prithvi Singh as the Karta of the HUF, and the plaintiffs are the coparceners of the said HUF. The reliefs sought by the plaintiffs through the present Suit are as under:
“a) Pass a preliminary decree of partition thereby declaring the 38/147 share of the plaintiffs jointly in the suit properties detailed hereunder:
i. Land in revenue estate of Village Mitraon, Delhi bearing Kh. No. 38//6/2(0- 13), 7/2(3-8), 8/1(3-4), 13(4-16), 18(4- 16), 23/1(1-2), 44//13/3(1-4), 14/2(2-8), 15/2(2-8), 16(4-16), 17(4-16) and 18/1(0- 14), 45//11/2(2-0), 20(4-16) admeasuring 41 Bighas and 1 Biswa. Since the land is assessed to land revenue, hence the land can be identified by Khasra No's/revenue records.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) 170/2019 Page 2 of 13 ii. Kayami residential plot of land bearing Kh. No.208/2 (0-4) i.e. about 200 sq. yds. situated in abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Copy of Aks Shizra of Kh.No. 208/2 is filed with plaint.
iii. Kayami residential plot of land bearing Kh. No. 209 (7-2) i.e. about 7,100 sq. yds. situated in abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Copy of Aks Shizra of Kh.
No. 209 is filed with plaint.
iv. Kayami residential plot of land bearing Kh. No. 245 (0-9) i.e. about 450 sq. yds. situated in abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Copy of Aks Shizra of Kh. No.245 is filed with plaint.
v. Old Laldora Abadi house bearing House No. 224 built on a plot of land admeasuring 110 sq. yards in abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Site plan filed with plaint as Site Plan „A‟.
vi.Old Laldora Abadi plot admeasuring about 600 sq. yds. in Kh. No. 115 min. of abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Site Plan filed with plaint as Site Plan 'B'.
vii. Old Laldora Abadi plot admeasuring 110 sq. yds. in Kh. No. 115 min. of abadi of Village Mitraon, Delhi. Site Plan filed with plaint as Site Plan „C‟.
viii. Residential Plot bearing No. 258 admeasuring about 1865 sq. mtrs. carved out of Khasra No. 476 of Village Mitraon, presently known as colony named as A- Block, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh, Delhi 110043. Site Plan of plot is filed with plaint is Site Plan 'D'.
b) Pass a final decree of partition by separating the 38/147 share of the plaintiffs in the suit properties detailed above by metes and Signature Not Ve