352 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 21.04.2025 Pronounced on: 04.07.2025

1. CR-97-2025 (O&M)

Aradhna Jain ….Petitioner Versus Dinesh Kumar Jain and Others ...Respondents

2. CR-1990-2025 (O&M)

Anshul Jain and Others ….Petitioners Dinesh Kumar Jain and Others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate with Ms. Niti Jain, Advocate and Ms. Nandita Verma, Advocate for the petitioner in CR No.97 of 2025.

Ms. Ananya Ghosh, Advocate and Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners in CR No.1990 of 2025.

Ms. Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate and Ms. Anjali Rani, Advocate for respondents No.2(i) and 2(iii) and 4.

Mr. Amit Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sudhir Paruthi, Advocate for LRs of respondent No.9.

****

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J

1. The aforetitled revision petitions shall be decided by way of this common judgment, for, challenge in both revision petitions is to the order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar vide which two applications were decided. The first application preferred under Section 152/153 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) for correction of Schedule A forming part of the preliminary decree dated 29.03.1985 was allowed. The second application moved by the present petitioner under Section 151 CPC seeking directions that whenever any application is filed by the plaintiff qua the property in question, due notice be given to the applicants before adjudicating on any such application was dismissed. 2. Challenge has also been laid to the order dated 23.12.2024 (Annexure P-3) vide which the report of the Local Commissioner appointed vide order dated 23.05.2024 to visit the plot No.57, Block-C, Veer Nagar, Jain Colony, Delhi was sought and parties were directed to remain present at the time of visit of the Local Commissioner at the spot. Whereas CR No.97 of 2025 has been preferred by Ms. Aradhna Jain who is stated to the owner of Upper Ground Floor and Fourth Floor of property bearing No.57, Veer Nagar, Jain Colony, Delhi, CR No.1990 of 2025 has been filed by Mr. Anshul Jain, Mr. Anuj Jain and Ms. Anita Jain who are the owners of First and Second Floor of the said property.

3. Facts shall essentially be derived from CR No.97 of 2025. However, wherever necessary, facts as regards CR No.1990 of 2025 shall also be mentioned. One Sh. Vidya Parkash son of Sh. Jit Mal Jain filed a suit (Annexure P-14) for partition of 7/30 shares of Joint Hindu Family Property mentioned in Schedule A and Schedule B thereof and for rendition of accounts of the said Joint Hindu Family Property. Schedule A mentioned immovable properties whereas Schedule B mentioned movable properties and Schedule C mentioned business concerns. Schedule A listed 17 properties out of which, the present lis is concerned with property mentioned at Serial No.16 i.e. Plot No.51, Veer Colony, Delhi. The suit was decreed by the Court of learned Sub-Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment and decree dated 29.03.1985 (Annexure P-17) and a preliminary decree for partition of the properties mentioned in Schedule A and Schedule B was passed. This decree was upheld in First Appeal. RSA No.786 of 2010 titled as ‘Rajinder Kumar Vs. Smt. Satya Wati @ Satya and Others’ was decided on 06.07.2015 (Annexure P- 18) and the decree was upheld. The Special Leave Petition against the said decision of the High Court was dismissed on 29.03.2016 (Annexure P-19).

4. After the dismissal of the SLP, an application (Annexure P-20) for the grant of final decree and partition of properties mentioned in Schedule A, B and C was filed. Vide order dated 23.05.2024 (Annexure P-22), Sh. Anil Verma, Advocate who had been appointed as Local Commissioner on 15.09.2022 was directed to visit the property for inspection to suggest the mode of partition. It appears and in fact it is the case of the petitioners that after the passing of this order, the petitioners came to