$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment reserved on: 09.12.2025

Judgment pronounced on: 18.12.2025

+ RFA(OS) 51/2025 & CM APPL. 53041/2025 (Stay)

SIMI ARUN PANDEYA .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Senior

Advocate with Mr. Preet

Oberoi, Advocate.

versus

KUMUDINI MITTAL & ORS. .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Suryakant Singla, Senior

Advocate with Ms. Mayanka

Dhawan, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN

SHANKAR

J U D G M E N T

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present Appeal, filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, CPC and Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, seeks to set aside the Order dated 29.05.2025, Impugned Order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A. No. 11590/2025 filed in CS(OS) 438/2022 titled as „Ms. Simi Arun Pandeya v. Mr. Amit Mittal‟. The said application was filed under

Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC by the Appellant/Plaintiff.

2. The sole issue that arose for consideration before the learned Single Judge, and which stands adjudicated in the Impugned Order, is the very issue that survives for determination in the present Appeal. As expressly and fairly acknowledged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant/Plaintiff, the scope of the present Appeal is narrowly circumscribed and confined exclusively to the judicial construction and interpretation of Clause I(a) of the Will dated 03.07.1992, executed by late Smt. Angoori Devi Mittal, mother of the Appellant and grandmother of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, which Will was duly attested and registered on 17.06.1999.

BRIEF FACTS:

3. The present Appeal arises from CS(OS) 438/2022 instituted before this Court by the Appellant/Plaintiff seeking partition, declaration, rendition of accounts, permanent injunction, etc., of property bearing No. B-102, Swasthya Vihar, Delhi-110092, Suit Property forming part of the estate of late Smt. Angoori Devi Mittal and late Sh. Surendra Kumar Mittal.

4. It is admitted that the suit property was the self-acquired property of late Smt. Angoori Devi, who executed a Will dated 03.07.1992, registered on 17.06.1999. The execution and validity of the said Will were accepted by both sides.

5. The Appellant-Plaintiff and the Defendant, late Sh. Amit Mittal, are the only children of the Testatrix. Upon the demise of the original Defendant during the suit, his Class-I legal heirs were impleaded and now constitute the Respondents in the present Appeal.

6. Under the Will, the property is bequeathed floor-wise. The First Floor is bequeathed absolutely to the Plaintiff/Appellant. One room each on the Second Floor is bequeathed to the Plaintiff/Appellant and the original Defendant. Clause I(a) further vests the Ground Floor absolutely in the husband, Sh. Surendra Kumar Mittal, Surendra Kumar Mittal/ S.K. Mittal, with full and unfettered powers of disposal, and provides that, upon his demise, the Ground Floor shall devolve upon the son, namely, the original Defendant.

7. Late Sh. Surendra Kumar Mittal (Husband of the testatrix), the primary legatee of the Ground Floor, died intestate on 05.09.2019, without having disposed of or alienated the Ground Floor during his lifetime.

8. Before the learned Single Judge, the Appellant contended that the Ground Floor formed part of the father‟s intestate estate and, accordingly, devolved in equal shares upon the Plaintiff/Appellant and the original Defendant under the law of intestate succession.

9. The Respondents (Legal Heirs of the original Defendant) contended that Clause I(a) created a valid residuary or contingent bequest, which became operative upon the father‟s death since the Ground Floor remained undisposed, thereby vesting it exclusively in the original Defendant.

10. Vide Order dated 29.05.2025, while adjudicating the Plaintiff/ Appellant‟s application under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, the learned Single Judge accepted the Defendant/Respondents‟ construction, holding Clause I(a