$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment reserved on:16.12.2025

Judgment pronounced on:22.12.2025

Judgment uploaded on:22.12.2025

+ FAO(OS) NO. 71/2024

VIJAY VERMA .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Hari Shankar Jain, Mr.

Vishnu Shankar Jain, Mr. Parth Yadav and Ms. Mani Munjal,

Advs. versus

INDIRA WARMAN & ORS. .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Ravinder Singh, Ms.

Raveesha Gupta, Mr. Ritvik Bhardwaj and Ms. Nishita Kushwaha, Advs. for R-2 to R-

6.

Mr. Kunal Kher, Adv. for R-14. Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan and Mr. Arindam Bharadwaj, Advs. with Ms. Zainab Zehra Kazmi, Legal Assistant for R-

15/DSIIDC.

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. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant/Defendant No.8 assails the correctness of the Order dated 29.02.2024 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Order‟], whereby the prayer of the Defendant No.8 to be transposed as Plaintiff No.2 has been rejected

by the learned Single Judge.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to by their status and rank in the suit, i.e., CS(OS) No.2137/2006.

FACTUAL MATRIX:

3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

4. The genealogical chart of the family, indicating the array of parties and their corresponding position in the suit as well as in the present Appeal, is extracted hereinbelow:

5. Sh. Raghubir Singh Verma and Smt. Sushila Verma died intestate on 13.11.1989 and 20.06.2005, respectively. The immovable properties left behind by the deceased parents comprise property bearing No. A-181, Defence Colony, New Delhi; and Plot Nos.30 and 201, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi [hereinafter collectively referred to as the „suit properties‟].

6. The underlying civil suit, CS(OS) No.2137/2006, was instituted by the Plaintiff/Respondent No.1, Smt. Indira Warman, seeking partition and division by metes and bounds of the suit properties, along with the rendition of accounts and mesne profits.

7. Defendant No.1/Respondent No.2 has contested the suit by setting up an alleged Will dated 15.09.1983, purportedly executed by the late Sh. Raghubir Singh Verma. It is further alleged by Defendant No.1 that the property bearing No.A-181, Defence Colony, New Delhi–110024 was mutated by L&DO on 07.11.2000, in favour of the son of Defendant No.1, Sh. Shivi Singh Verma.

8. Defendant No.8 is one of the sisters of the Plaintiff and is the legal heir of the suit property, having a 1/9^th share in the suit properties along with other movable assets. Defendant No.8, in substance, supports the case of the Plaintiff for partition of the suit properties. She has also filed another suit, CS(OS) No.2028/2009, for declaration, mesne profit and damages, which is connected with the present suit. Common issues were framed in both suits on 30.07.2013. 9. Further, Defendant No.8 has stated that Defendant No.1 sold property bearing No. 201, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, to Respondent No.14, Texaco Overseas Pvt. Ltd., and, from the sale proceeds, purchased property bearing No. 24, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi. It is further stated by Defendant No.8 that Defendant No.1, along with his wife and son, continues to enjoy the rental income from properties bearing Nos.30 and 24, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi.

10. At the same time, Sh. Shivi Verma had filed a probate petition vide Test Case No.78/22, which was tagged with the present suit on 18.05.2015. The common evidence is being recorded in all three cases.

11. Pertinently, the suit has been pending since 2006. The issues have been framed, and statements of some witnesses have also been recorded. However, it is stated by Defendant No.8 that the Plaintiff is not taking a keen interest in prosecuting the case with due diligence, which prompted the Defendant No.8 to file an application, I.A. No. 9262/2011, seeking transposition as Plaintiff No.2, which