JAGDISH KUMAR SACHDEVA Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER SACHDEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2007 which had reversed the finding of the trial judge dated 19.1.2005. Vide judgment and decree dated 19.1.2005 the suit filed by the Plaintiff Jagdish Sachdeva against his brother Subhash Chander Sachdeva seeking a declaration (to the effect that the family settlement dated 17.3.1991 arrived at between the parties qua suit property i.e. the property bearing No. B -1/277, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi as also shop at Bhajanpura, Delhi is legal and binding upon the parties with a further prayer of permanent injunction qua the suit property) had been decreed in his favour. Impugned judgment had reversed this finding. Suit of the Plaintiff stood dismissed.

(2.) PARTIES are real brothers. Plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction claiming the aforenoted papers. His averment was that their father died intestate at which time the Plaintiff was a minor aged six years. The Defendant was the eldest brother in the family; their father had left behind four properties; they are as follows:

(3.) IN the written statement this stand was refuted. In para 3 (iii) of the written statement it was stated that a Criminal Misc. 4572/1993 had been filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court by him for quashing the criminal complaint filed by the wife of the Plaintiff which is pending; it is pointed out that in para 6 and 7 of the reply affidavit filed by the wife of the Plaintiff she had clearly stated that the agreement dated 17.3.1991 was not an agreement arrived at out of the free consent of the parties; it was thus not binding. It is pointed out that the aforenoted suit property had been purchased by the Defendant from his own funds and it was not out of the ancestral funds; their father had in fact left no estate.