LAWS(DLH)-1992-10-21

RATTAN LAL SAHDEV Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR

Decided On October 14, 1992
RATTAN LAL SAHDEV Appellant
V/S
KRISHAN KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff his filed the present suit for partitionand separation of his 1/4th share in the immoveable property bearing No. 3,Netaji Subhash Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi after the respective shares ofthe plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 to 4 have been defined and determined.

(2.) Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed an application, being 1. A.No. 1538/89, under order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the Codeof Civil Procedure for grant of ad-interim injunction in his favour. On thesaid application, an ex-parte ad-interim injunction order was passed on 23/02/1989, whereby the defendants were restrained from making anyalteration, selling, mortgaging, disposing or parting with possession and lettingout any part of the property in question. On being served with the notice inthe application, defendants Nos. 2 and 3 moved an application being I.A. No. 1788/90, under order 39 Rule 4 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for vacation ofthe said ex-parte injunction order. This order will dispose of both the aforesaidapplications.

(3.) The plaintiff claims that by virtue of two registered sale deedsdated 27/01/1967 and 4/08/1970 in respect of l/4th share each inthe subject property, executed jointly in his and defendant No. 1's favour, hebecame co-owner of l/4th undivided share in the said property along withdefendants Nos. 1 to 4, who, according to the plaintiff, have 25%, 25%, 14%and 11% undivided share respectively. Para 9 of the plaint sets out thedetails of the portions of the property in occupation of the plaintiff and eachof the defendants. The plaintiff alleges that despite demand, the defendantshave not bothered to partition the property in accordance with the share ratioand he has now come to know that they are negotiating for sale of their undivided shares. Plaintiff's case is that if the defendants succeed in disposing of their undivided shares in the property to a third party without effecting partition, he will be put to unnecessary problems and long litigation. Hence theapplication.