$-

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV + CS(OS) 2046/2015 & I.A. 14119/2015 MS. NEELU CHADHA WIFE OF MR SAURABH CHADHA FLAT NO 505, SECTOR A, POCKET C, VASANT KUNJ NEW DELHI-110070 ....PLAINTIFF (Through: Mr. Arpit Sharma, Mr. Anil Sharma, Mr. Anant Sharma and Mr.

Aman Sharma, Advs.)

Versus

1. SUNIL SETHI SON OF LATE JYOTI SWARUP SETHI C-99, ANAND NIKETAN, NEW DELHI

2. ANIL SETHI SON OF LATE JYOTI SWARUP SETHI C-99, ANAND NIKETAN, NEW DELHI

3. SUKSHAM SETHI WIFE OF LATE SH SATISH SETHI

302, RAGHAV RESIDENCY, ROAD NO. 11, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD 500034.

4. PUNISH SETHI SON OF LATE SH SATISH SETHI

302, RAGHAV RESIDENCY, ROAD NO. 11, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD 500034.

5. DELHI DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY WING INA, VIKAS SADAN NEW DELHI SERVICE TO BE EFFECTED THROUGH ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN

6. ANAND NIKETAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., ANAND NIKETAN, NEW DELHI-110021 THROUGH ITS SECRETARY NEW DELHI- 110001 ....DEFENDANTS (Through: Mr. Alok Kumar, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Monisha A. Narain, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Mr. Varun Maheshwari and Mr. Manan Soni, Advs. for D- 1&2. Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, Ms. Latika Malhotra and Ms. Saumya Soni and Mr. Vishal Vaid, Advs. for D-5)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % Reserved on: 16.12.2025 Pronounced on: 27.01.2026 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT

The suit is for partition of property bearing No. C-99, Anand Niketan, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit property), originally belonging to late Mr. Joti Swarup Sethi. The plaintiff is his grand-daughter, defendants no. 1 and 2 are his sons, whereas, defendants no. 3 and 4 are the plaintiff’s mother and brother respectively. Defendant no. 5 is Delhi Development Authority and defendant no. 6 is the co-operative society which allotted the suit property in the name of late Mr. Joti Swarup Sethi.

2. The family tree is extracted below, for reference:

Late Mr. Joti Swarup Sethi ----- Late Mrs. Ved Sethi Mrs. Suksham Sethi Late Mr. Satish Sethi Mr. Sunil Sethi Mr. Anil Sethi (defendant no. 3) (father of the plaintiff) (defendant no. 1) (defendant no. 2)

Ms. Neelu Chadha Mr. Punish Sethi (plaintiff) (defendant no. 4)

3. The case set up by the plaintiff is that the suit property was sub-leased to late Mr. Joti Swarup Sethi by defendant no. 6 in the year 1968. He passed away intestate on 03.08.1972, leaving behind his wife, Mrs. Ved Sethi, defendants no. 1 and 2, and the plaintiff’s father, Mr. Satish Sethi. Mr. Satish Sethi passed away on 04.07.1977, leaving behind the plaintiff, and defendants no. 3 and 4. It is alleged that subsequent to her father’s death, the plaintiff and defendant no. 4, who were minors at the time, and defendant no. 3 were maltreated by defendants no. 1 and 2 and were forced to leave the suit property.

4. The plaintiff further avers that she was always assured by their relatives that her family would be given its rightful share in the properties of late Mr. Joti Swarup Sethi, and in spite of the same, defendants no. 1 and 2 have refused to do so. The suit property presently stands mutated and Conveyance Deed dated 16.07.2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Conveyance Deed) has been executed after conversion as ‘freehold- property’, in the names of defendants no. 1 and 2. The plaintiff’s case is that she became aware of the same only on 14.08.2014, when the said information was disclosed by defendant no. 5, upon an application by the plaintiff. On a perusal of the documents, the plaintiff realised that there were discrepancies in the manner in which the mutation was carried out and the Conveyance Deed was executed.

5. The plaintiff further claims to have made a representation before defendant no. 5, highlighting the aforesaid alleged discrepancies, but the same was rejected on the ground that defendant no. 5 was not the competent forum to look into the said aspects. The plaintiff,