PANKAJ KUMAR Vs. PREM PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO one appears for the plaintiff although it is 2.45 pm. I have therefore heard the counsel appearing for the defendant no.1.

(2.) THE present suit for partition was filed seeking partition of the properties stated in Schedule A to the plaint. Incidental relief of injunction was also sought. The properties which are mentioned in Schedule A are as under:-

(3.) SO far as rest of the eleven properties which are stated in Schedule A are concerned, counsel for the defendant no.1 states that neither has the plaintiff filed any proof of either of the said properties at Serial Nos. (2) to (12) as being the properties of the defendant no.1 or they being the properties of an alleged HUF. In fact, counsel for the defendant no.1 states that he would very happily take ownership interest in any of these eleven properties, however, there are no such properties in existence, and the suit was misconceived so far as these properties are concerned. I accept the arguments of the counsel for the defendant no.1 and hold that there are no HUF properties as mentioned at Sl. Nos. 2 to 12. I note that with respect to immovable properties at Serial Nos. 8 to 10 in Schedule A, there are no particulars at all given of the details of such immovable properties. The properties at Serial No.11 are really movable in the nature of shareholding etc once again of which no particulars have been filed or proved. Details mentioned at Serial No. 12 are of allegedly any other property pertaining to the joint family and, therefore, such properties mentioned in Serial No. 12 are of no legal effect.