HARDEEP KAUR Vs. SADHU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs, who are four in number, have filed the present suit to claim reliefs of partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction against the three defendants. The reliefs of partition have been sought in respect of the following two properties;

(2.) THE case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff No. 1 is the widow and plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 are the children of late Shri Gurbachan Singh. The plaintiffs state that Smt. Sant Kaur, wife of late Shri Balwant Singh, was the mother of late Shri Gurbachan Singh and defendant Nos. 1 to 3. Late Shri Gurbachan Singh pre-deceased his mother. He passed away on 14.10.1986. Late Smt. Sant Kaur died on 13.08.1996 and at the time of her death, she was the owner of property bearing No. 2113/164, Tri Nagar, Delhi. The plaintiffs claim that they have jointly succeeded to 1/4 th share in the said property of late Smt. Sant Kaur. The further claim of the plaintiffs is that the father-in-law of plaintiff No. 1 and the grandfather of plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 ­ late Shri Balwant Singh, was the owner of factory premises No. 256/9, Gali No. 7, Padam Nagar, Kishan Ganj, Delhi, wherein the business of M/s Balwant Plastic Industries was being carried on. They claim that after the demise of late Shri Balwant Singh, and thereafter Smt. Sant Kaur, the said factory premises has also devolved upon the plaintiffs in one share and defendant Nos. 1 to 3 equally. The plaintiffs claim 1/4th share in each of the two properties above mentioned. The further case of the plaintiff is that at the relevant time, the business of M/s Balwant Plastic Industries was being conducted by Shri Gurbachan Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs and the three defendants - who were his brothers. After the demise of late Shri Gurbachan Singh on 14.10.1986, the plaintiff No. 1 was inducted as a partner in the partnership business of M/s Balwant Plastic Industries. The plaintiffs state that the defendants have not rendered the accounts in respect of the said partnership business. Consequently, the relief of rendition of accounts of the said business is also claimed by the plaintiff. The claim for permanent injunction is premised on the rights claimed by the plaintiffs in the aforesaid two properties.

(3.) THE defendants, in their written statement do not deny ­ and rather admit, that after the demise of late Shri Gurbachan Singh, plaintiff No. 1 had been taken in as a partner in the firm M/s Balwant Plastic Industries. The defendants, however, deny that they have not rendered accounts of the said firm to plaintiff No. 1. The defendant state that the business of M/s Balwant Plastic Industries was not profitable after the year 2000 and the same was dissolved by the dissolution deed dated 30.06.2007, by which the assets and liabilities were divided amongst the partners. The defendants have further averred that the assets of the factory were sold out in the year 2007 and plaintiff No. 4, son of late Shri Gurbachan Singh, received 1/3 rd share in the sale proceeds though the plaintiffs were entitled for only 25% share as per partnership deed dated 02.04.1992, according to which defendant No. 1 is entitled to 40% share and defendant No. 3 is entitled to 35% share. The further defence of the defendant was that during life time of late Shri Gurbachan Singh, with a view to settle his share, a family settlement was reached where under Plot No. 155, Pocket D-12, Sector 8, Rohini, Delhi, allotted by the DDA was given to Shri Gurbachan Singh to avoid family disputes. This plot was given to the plaintiff No. 1, as Gurbachan Singh had died due to cancer.