RAM MALIK Vs. SUMITRA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff Sri Ram Malik is the son of Chander Bhan Malik. Chander Bhan Malik is the common ancestral and died in 31/8/1989. He left behind his widow, defendant no.1 Smt. Sumitra Devi, three other sons Narinder Kumar Malik, defendant no.2, Rajinder Kumar Malik, defendant no.3 and Raj Kumar Malik, defendant no.4 besides two daughters Santosh Katyal and Saroj Madan, arrayed as defendants 5 and 6.

(2.) The plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition, declaration, rendition of accounts, mesne profits and other reliefs, pleading, inter alia, that his father Chander Bhan Malik during his life time acquired and owned extensive properties both immovable and movable. It included the following properties:

(3.) The said properties were self-acquired properties of the deceased. The deceased is alleged to have died intestate and plaintiff claims that he has 1/7th share in the properties. After the death of the father of the plaintiff property bearing no. A-1041 New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur is stated to be in possession of defendants 3 and 4. Property bearing no. 290 Azadpur, Subzi Mandi, Delhi is in possession of defendant no.4. Property bearing no.253 Sarai Pipal Thala, Delhi is in possession of defendants 1, 3 and 4 while property no. 2451, Hudson Lines, Kingsway Camp, Delhi till recently was a vacant plot. It was held by defendants as co sharers. Plaintiff was in constructive possession of these properties. It is asserted that on 23/07/2000 plaintiff found that there was some construction activity oh the plot at Hudson Lines, Kingsway Camp. For the first time a will purported to have been executed by the father of the plaintiff was shown which as per the plaintiff is a forged document. When he visited the plot at Hudson Lines, Kingsway Camp, he met defendant no.7 (Jeet Singh). Plaintiff apprehended that defendants, 1 2 and 6 have entered into some collaboration with defendant no.7 for raising construction because defendant no.7 is in the said business. Plaintiff on these facts asserting that he has 1/7th share in the property and that defendants are setting up a will seeks partition of the property besides rendition of accounts and mesne profits.