ILARIA KAPUR Vs. RAKESH KAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the applicant, the defendant No.3, alleges that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action qua the defendant No.3 and being barred by Hindu Law as well as the provisions contained in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, deserves rejection at the threshold. The aforesaid application is predicated on the contention of the defendant No.3 that she being a woman cannot be a coparcener in the HUF of her husband/sons and, therefore, the properties owned by her cannot be termed as HUF properties belonging to or vesting in the coparcenary comprising of her husband and her sons, as the law does not permit her to blend her properties with the HUF properties. It is asserted by the defendant No.3 that all the properties, owned and possessed by her are protected by the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937, the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 and the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and in view thereof, the suit is barred within the meaning of Rule 11(d) of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) It may be noted that the suit in which the aforesaid application is filed is a suit for partition, rendition of accounts, etc., filed by the plaintiff, minor Hindu female through her next friend, her mother, Ms. Sapna Kapur. The mother of the plaintiff and the defendant No.1, who is the father of the plaintiff, though have a continuing and subsisting marriage, are involved in multifarious litigation, to which it is not deemed necessary to advert at this juncture. Suffice it to say that there are allegations and counter-allegations. Several orders have been passed in the ongoing litigation between the parties from time to time by various Courts including the Guardianship Court.

(3.) As delineated in the plaint, the case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff and the defendants are Hindus governed by Mitakshara law. Late Major Kailash Chander Kapur (Retd.), his wife Ms. Ritu Kapur (the defendant No.3) and their two sons Mr. Rakesh Kapur (defendant No.1) and Mr. Ravi Kapur (defendant No.2) constituted a Hindu Undivided Family, which resided together at B-103, Som Vihar Apartment, R.K. Puram, Delhi. Their family business commonly known as "Ace Detectives India" was started in 1984 as a private detective agency and over a period of time other family businesses sprung up including M/s. International Security, M/s. Ace Consultants and M/s. Absolute Security Pvt. Ltd. The joint family acquired several properties in Delhi, Gurgaon and Punjab from the funds generated with the joint labour and efforts of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and of their late father. Some properties were purchased and acquired in the name of Major Kailash Chander Kapur; others in the names of the defendant Nos.1, 2 and 3. A list of the vast immovable and movable assets of the Hindu Joint Family is filed with the plaint as Annexure-A.