$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 138/2026, CM APPL. 9394/2026, 9395/2026 & 9396/2026 VIPIN SHARMA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ishan Sanghi Ms. Poorvashi Kalra, Advocates.

versus SH. JAGROOP SHARMA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: None CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 11.02.2026

1. Appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as, “CPC”) has been filed on behalf of the Appellant against the Order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the Ld. District Judge-03, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, whereby, Suit of the Plaintiff/Appellant for Declaration, Partition and Permanent Injunction was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, by holding that the Suit was barred by law and disclosed no cause of action.

2. Briefly stated, CS No. 726/2019 for Declaration, Partition and Permanent Injunction was filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff. The facts are that Respondent No.1, Mr. Jagroop Sharma, is the father of the Appellant, Mr. Vipin Sharma, Respondent No. 2, Ms. Sheela, is his stepmother, and Respondent No. 3, Ms. Preeti, is his stepsister. Respondent No. 1, had married Ms. Geeta Sharma, mother of the Appellant and from the said wedlock, the Appellant and his brother, Respondent No. 4, Mr. Vikas Sharma, were born on 02.02.1985 and 09.10.1979, respectively. Ms. Geeta Sharma left the company of Respondent No. 1 in the year 1986, leaving behind the Appellant Mr. Vipin Sharma and Respondent No. 4, and that her whereabouts are not known.

3. It was further submitted that Respondent No. 1 thereafter, remarried Respondent No. 2, and from their wedlock one daughter, Respondent No. 3, was born. It is also stated that, at the time of her marriage with Respondent No. 1, Respondent No. 2, brought a son Mr. Pankaj, who was approximately four years of age.

4. The Appellant claims that his grandfather, late Mr. Ram Chander Sharma had three brothers, namely Mr. Lakmi Chand Sharma, Mr. Hari Chander and Mr. Harkishan. Four of them had purchased a joint property, i.e., a vacant plot admeasuring 225 square yards, bearing Khasra No. 193, Mahehwari Block, Village Sikdarpur, in abadi Sh. Ram Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi, from one Mr. Gopal s/o Mr. Lakshman Das, the attorney holder of Ms. Ram Payari Devi, vide registered documents dated 09.03.1959.

5. Thereafter, an oral settlement took place between the grandfather and his brothers, whereby the property was divided into four equal shares, and an area of 56 square yards (out of the total 225 square yards) fell to the share of the grandfather. It was further stated that the grandfather constructed a house on the said portion, numbered as H. No. 1/5104, Gali No. 4, Balbir Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as “Suit Property”).

6. It is averred that the complete ground floor of the Suit Property, comprising one hall, one store room, one toilet-cum-bathroom, one kitchen and one shop-cum-room, was used by Respondent No. 3 as a boutique shop. The Appellant averred to be in possession of one room situated on the left side of the first floor of the suit property. Respondent No. 4 is in use and possession of the front portion of the same room, with a fibre-sheet shed and an open gallery in front thereof, and that Respondent No. 4 also shared a common kitchen with the Appellant and his family members.

7. The grandfather of the Appellant, died intestate in the year 1986, and that the grandmother, Ms. Chalti Devi, had predeceased him in the year 1979. The grandfather had one son, i.e., Respondent No. 1, and three daughters, namely Ms. Kiranwati, Ms. Surajwati and Ms. Tarawati, and that the three sisters relinquished their shares in the suit property in favour of Respondent No. 1, vide Relinquishment Deed dated 03.02.2010. Respondent No. 1 thus, became the absolute owner of the suit property.

8. The Appellant alleges that he was a co-owner of the Suit Property and had been residing therein since birth, and continued to live there aft