RAJIV SETH Vs. DAYA KISHAN MEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IA.No.1965/99 Defendants 1 to 5 have moved this application for amendment of their written statement. By way of amendment, defendants pray to amend para 16 of the written statement and add a preliminary objection denying the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Defendants contend that inadvertently they did not object in their written statement to the invocation of this Court's territorial jurisdiction and in para No.16 of the written statement, the last line the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court is, however, not denied be deleted and instead jurisdiction of this Court is denied be inserted. Defendants further seek to add following preliminary objection :

(2.) The plaintiff has filed reply to this application and contests the same.

(3.) A brief narration of facts of this case is necessary. The plaintiff, who is the grand son (son of pre-deceased daughter of late Seth Munni Lal Mehra) has filed this suit for partition against the defendants, who are primarily the sons and daughters and heirs of the pre-deceased son and daughter of late Seth Munni Lal Mehra. The suit, relates to the partition of various immovable properties left by deceased-Seth Munni Lal Mehra. As per the plaint allegations, some of the properties are situated in Delhi, some in Bombay and some in Agra. The plaintiff has invoked the jurisdiction of this court by alleging that the deceased owned and possessed , numerous self-acquired properties as narrated in para 2 of'the plaint including properties No.D-372, Defence Colony, New Delhi and 785, Nai Sarak, Delhi. Para No. 16 of the plaint, which relates! to the territorial Jurisdiction of this Court, is reproduced as under: