The court determined that the plaint disclosed a valid cause of action, necessitating a trial regarding the status of the property as part of a Hindu Undivided Family.

JUDGMENT

I.A. 8202/2025

1. This is an application under Order VII Rule 11(a) & (d) of the CPC filed by Defendant No.2 for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaint fails to disclose a cause of action and is barred by law.

2. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking a decree of partition, rendition of accounts and perpetual injunction against Defendants No.1, 12 and 13 in respect of immoveable property bearing No.F-4/16, Model Town, Delhi-110009 (hereinafter referred to as the ‗Suit Property’), claiming that he is a coparcener in the H.C. Guglani HUF.

3. Before dwelling into the factual background of the case, it is imperative to understand the genealogy of the Guglani family. The Family Tree of the Guglani Family, as given in the Plaint, is as under:

4. The other Defendants are siblings, legal heirs, or descendants of the above family members, arrayed on account of their lineage and claimed interests in the Suit Property.

5. Facts, in brief, leading to the present Suit, are as under:

a. Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani, the grandfather of the Plaintiff, migrated to Delhi along with his Joint Hindu Family at the time of Partition. It is stated that at that time, the family consisted of Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani, his wife Late Smt. Ganesh Devi Guglani, and their children—sons Hiralal C. Guglani, Late Wg. Cdr. Shyam Sunder Guglani, Gopal Guglani, and Jay Guglani, and daughters Dr. Laaj Virmani and Late Smt. Santosh Sushil. It is stated that the family lived jointly, constituting a traditional Hindu joint family.

b. It is stated that during his lifetime, Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani was engaged in professional work, including homeopathic medical practice, and also assisted in family business activities. It is stated that Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani supported his eldest son, Defendant No.1 Hiralal C. Guglani, in securing employment and business opportunities in Delhi and Mumbai. The family resided in official accommodations allotted to Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani for several years. It is stated that Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani invested a substantial sum in a film distribution venture through Defendant No.1, which resulted in losses, following which the family finally settled in Delhi.

c. It is stated that on 26.03.1957, a vacant plot bearing No. F-4/16, Model Town, Delhi was purchased by Defendant No.1 Hiralal C. Guglani in his own name by a registered sale deed. It is stated that the sale consideration of Rs.3,936.04/- was collected using the joint family funds by Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani and his wife by selling family jewellery and other assets. It is stated that the property, though registered in the name of Defendant No.1, is alleged to have been held by him in a fiduciary capacity for the benefit of the joint family and its coparceners. It is further stated that at the time when the abovementioned property was purchased, Defendant No.1 had just begun his professional career and was financially dependent on his father.

d. It is stated that construction on the property commenced in

1957–1958, with the ground floor being built first. It is stated that the entire family resided together in the premises as a joint family. It is further stated that Defendant No.1 got married in 1960, and subsequently, in 1964, the first and second floors were constructed to accommodate the growing family. It is stated that the constructions were funded jointly by Late Dr. Chuni Lal Guglani, Smt. Ganesh Devi Guglani, Defendant No.1, and Late Wg. Cdr. Shyam Sunder Guglani, who, even during his Air Force service, allegedly remitted a significant portion of his earnings for the family home.

e. It is stated that in