$~J-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Delivered on: 27.03.2026 + CS(OS) 53/2017 PANKAJ OSWAL .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mayank Mishra, Mr. Raunak Singh, Mr. Parag Rai, Mr. Kunwar Surya Pratap, Mr. Alay Raje and Mr. Arbind Gaur, Advocates with plaintiff in person.

Versus ARUNA OSWAL & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Sanjiv Kakra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Arora and Mr. Gourav Arora, Advocates for D1.

Mr. Vibhor Verdhan, Advocate for R2. Mr. Dinesh Moorjani, Advocate for D3.

Ms. Ridhima Verma, Mr. Shashwat Tripathi and Ms. Aparajita Singh, Advocates for applicant in IA. No. 12308/2025.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

JUDGMENT

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J I.A. 1737/2024 (under Order XII Rule 6 read with Order XX Rule 18(2)

and Section 151 CPC by the plaintiff.

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff seeking a judgement on admission and a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff declaring that:

a. The plaintiff is a Class-I legal heir of Late Mr. Abhey Kumar Oswal; and b. The plaintiff is entitled to 1/4^th share in the suit properties as listed in the amended schedule, specifically in the shares held by Late Mr.

Abhey Kumar Oswal in OAML [53530960 (39.88%)] and OGL [28540318 (11.11%)] at the time of his demise on 29.03.2016.

2. The case set up by the plaintiff as noted from the plaint as well as material on record is that the plaintiff is the eldest son of Late Mr. Abhey Kumar Oswal [‘Decedent’] and has filed the present suit inter alia seeking partition of estate of his late father claiming to be his class-I legal heir.

3. It is averred that Decedent was a Hindu by religion and a substantial shareholder, director and chairperson of the board of directors of Oswal Agro Mills Limited [‘OAML’] and Oswal Greentech Limited [‘OGL’], the two main holding companies of the Abhey Oswal Group.

4. It is further averred that the Decedent held 53530960 (39.88%) shares in OAML and 28540318 (11.11%) shares in OGL. The said shares form part of the scheduled properties as per the amended schedule which was taken on record bythis Court vide order dated 14.05.2018.

5. It is the case of the plaintiff that on 29.03.2016 Decedent passed away intestate leaving behind plaintiff and defendants as his Class-I legal heirs. Defendant no.1 is the wife; whereas defendant nos.2 and 3 are the younger son and daughter respectively, of Decedent.

6. It is further the case of the plaintiff that soon after passing of Decedent multiple meetings of OAML and OGL were clandestinely held whereby defendant no.1 was appointed as the Additional Director and Chairperson of both the companies. Also, defendant no.1 and one Mr. Anil Bhalla, who was the director of OAML and CEO & MD of OGL were authorized to act as authorized signatories and manage bank accounts of both the companies.

7. It is averred that observing oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the OAML after the demise of the Decedent, plaintiff approached the NCLT, Chandigarh by filing a petition being C.P. No. 56/CHD/PB/2018 under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013. In the said petition, plaintiff asserted his locus to maintain the petition as being the beneficial owner of 1/4^th shares held by the Decedent. He also sought rectification of the Register of Members to record his name as the member of the Company to the extent of 1/4^th shares held by the Decedent, at the time of his demise.

8. In the said petition, defendant no. 1 herein filed an application objecting to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the plaintiff does not hold requisite shares to file the said petition. The NCLT vide order dated 13.11.2018 held that the company petition is maintainable since the plaintiff was entitled to claim 1/4^th shares held by the Decedent in OAML as his own shares. It was further held that the purported nomination in favor of defendant no. 1 by the Decedent will not affect the rights of the plaintiff to maintai