$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 14^th May, 2025 + CS(OS) 306/2025 & I.As. 12215-20/2025 NASIR .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. D. Hasija, Ms. Prachi Hasija and Mr. Dev Hans Kasana, Advocates versus ASHWANI KUMAR WADHWA AND OTHERS .....Defendants Through: Mr. Anil Hooda, Mr. Satendra Singh, Advocates for D-1 & D-2 Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate for D-

4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 %

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

J U D G M E N T

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J (ORAL)

1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking partition as well as seeking permanent and mandatory injunction against the defendants with respect to the land admeasuring 4 bighas and 16 biswas, comprised in Khasra Nos. 548/1 (3-12) and 550/2 (1-4), situated in village Satbari, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi (‘suit property’).

2. The plaintiff states that the suit property was owned by Sh. Hakumat Rai.

2.1 He states that after the demise of Sh. Hakumat Rai on 03.04.1994, the property devolved upon his widow, three daughters and four sons.

2.2 He states that Sh. Hakumat Rai’s widow and daughters executed a Signature Not Verified Signed By:MAHIMA CS(OS) 306/2025 Page 1 of 9 registered relinquishment deed dated 15.11.2010 in favour of the four sons thereby establishing the joint ownership of the four sons.

2.3 He states that the fourth son, Sh. Kamal Wadhwa, passed away in 2024 leaving behind his Class-I legal heirs, who have been arrayed as defendant nos. 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.

2.4 He states that the suit property, for ease of convenience, was divided by the sons of Sh. Hakumat Rai into two portions. The said portions have been identified as portion 1 and portion 2.

2.5 He states that portion 1 came to the share of defendant nos. 1 and 2 while portion 2 came to the shares of defendant no. 3 and the family of late Sh. Kamal Wadhwa.

2.6 He further states that this delineation in the property was carried out by oral partition between the four sons in the year 2009.

2.7 He states that the plaintiff herein has entered into an unregistered Agreement to Sell (‘ATS’) dated 09.04.2025 with defendant nos. 1 and 2 for portion 1 and, a part payment of Rs. 50,00,000/- had been made to defendant nos. 1 and 2.

2.8 He states that the balance amount of Rs. 8 crores is due and payable to defendant nos. 1 and 2 and it has been agreed between the parties that the said amount will be paid on or before 31.10.2025.

2.9 He states that however, defendant nos. 1 and 2 handed over the actual physical possession of portion 1 to the plaintiff by virtue of the unregistered ATS dated 09.04.2025 and there is also a separate possession receipt evidencing the same.

2.10 He states in the plaint that, despite having relinquished possession, defendants nos. 1 and 2 have now begun demanding additional payments Signature Not Verified Signed By:MAHIMA CS(OS) 306/2025 Page 2 of 9 and have threatened the plaintiff by interfering with his possession.

2.11 He states that defendants nos. 1 and 2 are attempting to trespass into portion 1 of the suit property and are making efforts to dispossess the plaintiff.

3. This Court has heard the counsel and perused the record.

4. The suit has been filed by affixing a court fee of Rs. 20 on the plea that the plaintiff (a prospective purchaser) is in possession of portion 1 of the suit property in furtherance of an unregistered ATS dated 09.04.2025.

5. The suit has been filed for the following reliefs: -

“(i) pass a decree of partition being land admeasuring 4 bighas and 16 biwas, comprised in Kharas No.548/1 (3-12) and 550/2 (1-4), situated in village Satbari, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi and separate possession of portion-1 of the suit property in possession of the plaintiff and portion-2, in joint possession of the defendant Noland the defendants Nos.4.1 to 4.3;

(ii) pass a decree of mandatory injunction in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 thereby directing the Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 to execute the Sale Deed as per the terms and cond