Y S MANCHANDA Vs. MADHURI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present common order will dispose of I.A. Nos. 2995/2010, 2996/2010 and CCP 68/2010. I.A. No. 2995/2010 is preferred by Defendant No. 2 seeking extension of time to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs directed by the Court in its order dated 10.11.2009 (while disposing of an earlier application for recall of orders, being I.A. No. 4552/2008 and other connected applications). I.A. No. 2996/2010 seeks, in turn, recall of the order of the Court dated 10.11.2009; CCP 68/2010 is somewhat connected, in the sense that the applicant, Sh. Y.S. Manchanda alleges that the second defendant, Ms. Madhuri Singh had defied the Court's order, by not depositing the said amount of Rs. 10 lakhs.

(2.) I.A. No. 2995/2010 is really a replay of the previous application, I.A. No. 4552/2008. The detailed facts are not being adverted as they have been recounted in the Court's order dated 10.11.2009. It would be sufficient for the present purpose to notice that the plaintiff in the suit had claimed partition. By relying on a General Power of Attorney and certain other documents said to have been executed by the defendant, his late brother, the predecessor-in-interest and husband of second defendant had filed a separate suit, being CS 304/1994, challenging the veracity and correctness of documents, based upon which the plaintiff had sought relief. The Court had decreed the present suit on 19.12.1997, holding that the plaintiff and defendants respectfully were entitled to one-fourth share by entitlement in the suit property. The first defendant, Sh. Bikramjeet Singh had appealed to the Division Bench by filing RFA 1/1999. In the course of Appellate proceedings, the Division Bench on 12.08.2002 recorded a subsequent development whereby the deceased second defendant's widow, Smt. Madhuri Singh, who is the present applicant, accepted the correctness, legality and validity of the Relinquishment Deed dated 28.11.1988 and further recorded that the appeal could be appropriately disposed of and that the parties would take appropriate steps to get the shares modified.

(3.) This order - settling the rights of the applicant, Smt. Madhuri Singh, was sought to be given effect to by the Single Judge, who modified the decree on 19.02.2003, in terms of the application moved, I.A. No. 11314/2004. The applicant thereafter moved an application, I.A. No. 4552/2008, alleging that fraud had been played upon her, as the other parties to the suit, who had assured to pay her certain amounts in the year 2002 had not honored their commitments. During the pendency of that application, and during the hearing of the application along with other applications, another application, being I.A. No. 12781/2009 was moved by Ms. Madhuri Singh. It would be necessary to extract the material averments in that application, which are in the following terms: