KIRPAL KAUR Vs. RAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit for partition and declaration. The plaintiff is the daughter-in-law of defendant No.1, being the widow of his late son Ripudaman Singh. Defendant No.2 is the son of defendant No.1, whereas defendants 3 and 4 are his daughters. It is alleged in the plaint that defendant No.1 had two brothers namely Prem Singh and Dayal Singh and one sister namely Smt. Har Kaur. One of his brothers, namely Dayal Singh, expired and share of his property is being used by his legal heirs, whereas his sister Har Kaur has relinquished her share in favour of the legal heirs of Dayal Singh. The remaining agricultural land is alleged to be jointly owned by defendant No.1 Ram Singh and his brother Prem Singh. It is further alleged that in the year 1954, defendant No.1, out of the funds received from the agricultural land purchased the plot bearing No.45, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, New Delhi, on which he constructed two rooms and kitchen, bathroom etc. in the year 1957-58. It is also alleged that in the year 1980-82, it was decided to reconstruct the entire property afresh as the husband of the plaintiff who had left for Kuwait in the year 1978-79 used to send money regularly to his parents. The amount sent by the husband of the plaintiff to defendants 1 and 2 is stated to be Rs.6,56,035/- (approx.). The plot at Sant Nagar, according to the plaintiff, was reconstructed out of the funds received from her husband and the income received from agricultural land situated in Punjab. The first floor of the property is occupied by defendants 1 and 2 whereas second floor is occupied by the plaintiff. The basement and the ground floor have been let out by the tenants from whom rent is being received by defendant No.1.

(2.) IT is also alleged that defendant No.1 had purchased a plot of land in Saini Farms in the name of the husband of the plaintiff. The plot was sold by defendant No.1 who gave only Rs.1,82,000/- to her husband while the balance amount of Rs.6,00,000/- was distributed amongst defendants 1 to 4 and the wife of defendant No.2.

(3.) THE suit has been contested by defendant No.1. It is alleged in the written statement that in a civil suit filed by him the plaintiff has admitted that plot at Sant Nagar was the self acquired property of the defendant No.1 and the only plea taken in that suit was that the construction on the plot was raised using the funds provided by the husband of the plaintiff. It is also alleged that the plaintiff and her husband had opted out of joint family and the ancestral property and had taken more than their share when they sold a plot at Saini Enclave for a sum of Rs.6 lakhs and appropriated the sale proceeds for their own purpose, though it is plaintiff's own case that plot at Saini Enclave was purchased by defendant No.1 in the name of her husband. It is also alleged that the plot of land bearing No.45, Sant Nagar, New Delhi was purchased by defendant No.1 by his own funds in the year 1954 when the husband of the plaintiff was only 7 years old. THE plot at Sant Nagar was constructed in two stages. During first stage, the ground floor was constructed in the year 1957-58 by defendant No.1, using his own funds and this fact has also been admitted by the plaintiff in the written statement filed by her in the suit instituted by defendant No.1. According to defendant No.1, on his retirement from Ministry of Defence in September, 1980, he completed the construction on plot No.45 at Sant Nagar, New Delhi, by using his retirement fund for this purpose along with the loans taken from relatives, friends and Sahara Investment and Finance Company. Regarding the agricultural land in Ropar, it has been alleged in the written statement of defendant No.1 that the aforesaid ancestral land was divided between him, his two brothers and one sister and during that division a piece of land measuring about 8 kanals and 18 marlas situated in Village Patial, District Ropar came to the share of defendant No.1 in the year 1972. THE land was given on Batai for cultivation and defendant No.1 used to get about 50 sears of wheat in May and 30 sears of maize in October every year out of the produce on that agricultural land, which used to be consumed by the family. No cash amount was received by defendant No.1 in respect of cultivation rights. It is also alleged that the plot at Saini Enclave, which defendant No.1 purchased in the name of husband of the plaintiff was sold by the husband of the plaintiff for Rs.6 lakh out of which Rs.1,82,500/- was received by way of bank draft and the balance amount of Rs.4,17,500/- was received by him in cash. THE cash received on sale of the plot at Saini Enclave was kept by the plaintiff in a locker with Punjab National Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi. In a meeting held on 28 th September, 1986, a family arrangement was worked out whereby it was decided that the plaintiff and her husband would keep the sale proceeds received from Saini Enclave plot but would not be entitled to any share in the agricultural land at Ropar nor will they claim any right in the self acquired dwelling house of defendant No.1 at Sant Nagar.