SNEHA SRIVASTAVA Vs. AMITA SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application under Order VII Rule 10 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'CPC') has been filed on behalf of defendant No.1 seeking return of plaint.

(2.) It is submitted that the plaintiff has filed a suit for Partition, Declaration, Cancellation, Permanent and Mandatory Injunction in respect to the property of the deceased husband Late Shri Ritesh Kumar Sinha and the matter is at the stage of completion of pleadings. The suit is in respect of various immovable properties and also in respect of movable properties. It is asserted that in terms of Sec. 16 of the CPC, a suit for partition can be filed only where the immovable property is situated. However, the properties in respect of which the partition is sought are located in Greater Noida. Since, no part of the immovable properties are situated in Delhi, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present suit in regard to the immovable properties.

(3.) In respect of movable properties, it is submitted that none of the defendant resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Defendant No.1 is a permanent resident of Jaipur, Rajasthan, where he is staying with his daughter. Defendant No.4 is permanently residing at Kaikondanahalli, Bangalore. Defendant No.5 is a resident of Jaipur, Rajasthan. It is claimed that plaintiff has deliberately misrepresented that defendant No.1 is residing within the jurisdiction of this Court, when in fact he is a permanent resident of Jaipur. This Court, therefore, has no territorial jurisdiction and the plaint is liable to be returned.