Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 7452
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anil Kshetarpal, Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, JJ
KIRANJIT GUJRAL & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
PAMINDER GUJRAL & ORS. – Respondent
FAO(OS) 89/2023 & CM APPL. 43618/2023 | RFA(OS) 43/2024, CM APPL. 47562/2024 & CM APPL. 70287/2024 | CS(OS) No. 3262/2012
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Uday Bedi, Ms. Smiksha Singhroha
For the Respondents: Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Mr. Karan Nagrath, Ms. Nupur Kumar, Ms. Niharika Nagrath, Ms. Mohita Nagrath, Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Ms. Niharika Tanwar, Mr. Arjun Nagrath, Mr. Bishan Pal Sharma, Mr. Kishan Yadav, Mr. Aryan Bhardwaj
The court upheld that a partition suit cannot proceed when it overlaps with pending probate proceedings as per Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 10 - Overlapping subject matters - Court ruled that a partition suit cannot proceed where issues are directly and substantially the same as in a pending probate proceeding. (Paras 32-35, 42)
(B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 151 - Inherent powers of the Court - The court can stay proceedings in cases where justice demands, even if such stay is not mandated by Section 10. (Paras 36-39)
Facts of the case:
The dispute arises over the will and properties of deceased individuals among their legal heirs, with appeals revolving around the validity of wills and entitlement to assets.
Findings of Court:
The Court emphasized that partition proceedings should await resolution of pending probate cases to avoid duplicative litigation.
Issues: The main issues included the validity and effect of wills on partition rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The law prohibits proceeding with a partition suit when the matter overlaps significantly with pending probate proceedings, adhering to both Section 10 and the inherent powers of the court for justice (Paras 32-35, 42).
Result: The appeal to stay the proceedings in the partition suit was allowed, pending resolution of related probate cases.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appeals arise from a civil suit concerning partition and probate matters. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. discussion of wills and properties entailed in the probate and inheritance disputes. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. arguments regarding stay under section 10 and inherent powers. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. court's interpretation of provisions in the code of civil procedure. (Para 20 , 24 , 32 , 36) |
| 5. final decision allowing the appeal and decision on the application for stay. (Para 40 , 44) |
1. With the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties, the present Appeals that arise out of the same civil suit bearing CS(OS) No. 3262/2012 titled as Shri Paminder Gujral & Ors. vs. Kiranjit Gujral & Ors., shall stand disposed of by this common Order.
2. FAO(OS) 89/2023 has been filed under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, against the Judgment dated 19.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge [hereinafter referred to as “LSJ”] in IA. No. 5138/2018 in CS(OS) No. 3262/2012, wherein the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “Code”] filed on behalf of Appellants seeking stay of the proceedings in terms of Section 10 of the Code, was dismissed.
3. The second Appeal, being RFA (OS) 43/2024, filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI of the Code, challenges the Judgment dated 28.06.2024 passed by the LSJ in I.A. 17361/2018 in CS(OS) No. 3262/2012, wherein the LSJ, while exercising the enabling powers under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code, passed a preliminary decree on admissions and thereby, partitioned the moveable assets of Late Mr. Mohinder Singh Gujral [hereinafter referred to as “MSG”] among his four children.
COMMON FACTUAL MATRIX
4. At the inception, it is apposite to advert to the relevant facts leading up to the filing of the present Appeals.
5. Sh. Paminder Singh Gujral, Smt. Neelu Chawla, Smt. Ranju Sayall [Respondent Nos.1 to 3, respectively], and Sh. Kiranjit Singh Gujral [Appellant No.1] are children of MSG and his wife, Late Smt. Upkar Gujral. Sh. Rohun Gujral and Sh. Rahil Gujral [Appellant Nos.2 and 3] are sons of Sh. Kiranjit Singh Gujral. For ease of convenience, the family tree has been reproduced below, demonstrating the status and rank of the parties before the learned Single Judge and before this Court.
6. Smt. Upkar Gujral passed away on 08.10.2004. Upon her demise, besides moveable properties, she left behind the following immoveable properties:
i. A-6, New Friends Colony, New Delhi- 110065 [hereinafter referred to as “New Friends Colony property”]
ii. 802- Vishal Bhawan, 95, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 [hereinafter referred to as “Nehru Place property”]
7. Late Smt. Upkar Gujral executed a Will dated 21.07.1995 bequeathing her moveable and immoveable assets in favour of her husband, MSG, which was subsequently probated vide Order dated 15.05.2007 in Probate Case No.234/2006 captioned M.S. Gujral v State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. passed by the District Court, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. However, after the death of MSG, the Respondents have applied for the revocation of the aforementioned probate by instituting a petition, being Probate Case No.42418/2016 captioned Paminder Singh Gujral & Ors. Vs. State & Ors., under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act , 1925, before the District Court, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The Respondents have submitted that the probate has been revoked vide Order dated 13.11.2019 passed by the Additional District Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ADJ”] and against the said Order, an Appeal, i.e., FAO 68/2020 captioned Kiranjit Gujral vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. is pending consideration in this Court. The next date of hearing of the said Appeal is 28.10.2025.
8. MSG passed away on 04.05.2012. During his lifetime, he executed two separate Wills, both dated 09.05.2008, in relation to the abovementioned two immoveable proper
