JANAK VOHRA Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition for mutation in her favour since the petitioner claims to be the only legal heir of the deceased father in whose name the flat stands registered and the Will is stated to have been executed by the late father on 7.3.96 in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent has produced the record and states that the respondent has received two applications. The first application is by the petitioner for mutation of the flat in her name and the second application is for conversion into freehold of the flat by the brother of the deceased owner who is the Uncle of the petitioner and who claims title on the the Uncle of the petitioner and who claims title on the basis of an agreement to sell coupled with power of attorney of 1997.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent it is further stated that the copy of the Will dated 7.3.1996 submitted by the petitioner mentions the factum of the execution of the earlier Will by the original allottee in favour of the Smt.Kanta Nayar wife of Sh.S K Nayar who is the brother of the original allottee being the father of the petitioner. In terms of the Will dated 7.3.1996, the earlier Will is sought to be revoked though the date of the earlier Will is not mentioned. The agreement to sell in favour of Sh.S K Nayar is dated 12.4.1997. In view of this fact both the parties were asked to appear in the office of the respondents with the original documents and since it was not possible to sort out the issue both parties were advised to have their disputes decided by the appropriate court of law.