SURESH SRIVASTAVA Vs. SUBODH SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IA No. 7098/2011(u/O. 12 R. 6 CPC)

(2.) As per the plaint though the suit property stood in the records of the DDA in the name of the defendant no. 1, however, all the parties to the suit i. e. the brothers and the father had entered into an agreement on 27.9.1978 recording the fact that the different parties had invested different amounts in this property and therefore this property is a joint property of all the parties. The agreement dated 27.9.1978 was followed by two other documents, one being a family settlement dated 3.2.1994 in which it is stated that all the parties have a 1/4th share in the suit property, and an affidavit of the defendant no. 1 of the same date to the same effect.

(3.) Defendant no. 1 has filed reply to the present application reiterating the stand in the written statement. In the written statement, the following defences are raised, and which are the defences which have been argued before me, and in addition an aspect that the suit requires trial after framing of issues on 30.8.2005 and therefore the application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC should be dismissed. The defences which have been raised by the defendant no. 1, contesting non-applicant, in his written statement are as under:-