UMA SHARMA Vs. YASHPAL BHANOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction. The plaintiff is the daughter of defendant No. 1 and sister of defendants 2 and 3. In the plaint, she had sought partition of property bearing Municipal No. M-63, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018, admeasuring 153.40 sq/mt. and ancestral property at village Dhihana, PO Baddon, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab, measuring 2 kila, 12 kanal, 16 marlas. It has been alleged in para 2 of the plaint that the properties set out above are either ancestral property or the properties purchased from the sale proceeds of ancestral properties. In para 9 of the plaint, it has been alleged that late Shri Walaiti Ram Bhanot, grandfather of the plaintiff, owned property No. A-4, Lajpat Nagar-III, which he has purchased at the time he was working with LIC. It has also been alleged that Shri Walaiti Ram Bhanot also owned ancestral properties mentioned in this paragraph. In para 10, it is alleged that the defendants, in order to deprive the plaintiffs of her share, sold the property No. A-4, Lajpat Nagar-III and property No. M-63, Vikaspuri, New Delhi was purchased in the name of Shri Walaiti Ram Bhanot and defendant No. 1.

(2.) IA No. 20698/2011 has been filed by the defendants, seeking rejection of the plaint primarily on the ground that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and the suit is not properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction. Another plea taken in the application is that this Court has no jurisdiction qua the properties situated in Punjab.

(3.) AS regards property No. M-63, Vikas Puri, New Delhi, the learned counsel for the plaintiff states that the case of the plaintiff is that this property was purchased from the funds generated by sale of property No. A-4, Lajpat Nagar-III, which in turn was purchased from the sale of ancestral property in Punjab.