$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment reserved on:15.12.2025

Judgment pronounced on: 22.12.2025

Judgment uploaded on: 22.12.2025

+ RFA(OS) 18/2023 and CM APPL. 44253/2025

SHRI CHARANJEET SINGH & ANR. .....Appellants

Through: Mr. Pawan Singh Bindra, Sr.

Adv. with Mr. Lakshay Dhamija, Ms. Vasudha Saini,

Ms. Liza Kesi, Advs.

versus

SHRI HARVINDER SINGH & ANR. .....Respondents

Through: Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Sh. Bir

Inder Singh, Ms. Antara, Advs.

for R-1.

Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Surpreet Kaur, Mr.

Karthik Goyal, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN

SHANKAR

J U D G M E N T

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. The Appellants assail the correctness of the order dated 06.07.2023 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Order‟] passed by the learned Single Judge [hereinafter referred to as „LSJ‟], while rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil

Procedure [hereinafter referred to as „CPC‟].

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties before this court shall

be referred to in accordance with their status before the LSJ.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. For a comprehensive consideration of the issues involved, requiring adjudication, it is apposite to first delineate the family genealogy and the attendant factual matrix, which are set out in the ensuing paragraphs.

4. The genealogy of the family reads as under:

5. While instituting the suit and the interim applications, the Plaintiffs, in brief, asserted as under:

5.1 The Plaintiffs claim that Sh. Ram Singh, his grand-father, migrated to India at the time of Partition in the year 1947 and thereafter commenced his business. Subsequently, in the year 1949, Sh. Sujan Singh and his brother Sh. Avinash Singh began business of scrap dealing. In due course, the Plaintiff No.1 and the Defendant No.1 joined their father‟s business which led to the forming of the partnership firm under the name and style of Sh. Sujan Singh and Sons. A Partnership Deed dated 04.04.1976 was executed, wherein Sh. Sujan Singh and his two sons being Plaintiff No.1 and the Defendant No.1 had an equal share. Shop No. 5162, Lahori Gate, Delhi became the asset of the partnership firm.

5.2 The Defendant No.1 used to handle the accounts and administrative affairs of the firm. All financial matters, including filing of income tax returns of the partnership and other family members, was done by Defendant No.1. During his lifetime, Sh. Sujan Singh acquired property bearing No. BF-29, Tagore Garden, New Delhi under Perpetual Lease Deed dated 05.03.1965. Subsequently, owing to the need for additional residential accommodation, property bearing No. F-61, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „Suit Property‟], was purchased on 27.03.1992, in the name of Defendant No.2 out of the funds of the partnership firm, 5.3 Sh. Sujan Singh died on 12.07.2009. After his demise, the Plaintiff No.1 and Defendant No.1 continued to run the business, and a Partnership Deed dated 18.07.2009 was executed, whereby the Plaintiff No.1 and Defendant No.1 became partners with equal shares of 50% each.

5.4 Since the family grew, need was felt to divide the business and properties, hence, it was divided. Accordingly, in February, 2013, the family reduced into writing the oral settlement by way of a Settlement Deed, wherein it was agreed that property bearing No. BF-29, Tagore Garden, New Delhi, will come to the share of Plaintiff No.1 and his family members and the Plaintiff No.1 would pay Rs. 75 lakhs to the Defendant No.1, the ownership of Shop No. 5158 will be that of the Plaintiff No.1, and whereas, Shop No. 5162 would be that of the Defendant No.1. The cash and stock of both the shops were to be divided in the ratio of 60:40 between the Defendant No.1 and the Plaintiff No.1. The Suit Property would go to the share of Defendant No.1.

5.5 In respect of property bearing No. A-3, Vishal Enclave, New Delhi, Defendant No.1 will have 50% share, whereas Plaintiff No.1 will have 37.5% share, whereas