SACHIN Vs. KRISHNA KUMARI NANGIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Suit has been filed by the plaintiffs seeking a decree of partition by metes and bounds and possession of property AB-14, Safdarjung Enclave, Community Centre, New Delhi. The plaintiffs also seek a decree of declaration declaring that the plaintiffs are the owners of the respective shares in respect of the said property and a decree for rendition of accounts in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants and other reliefs.

(2.) The brief facts on the basis of which the present Suit is filed are that plaintiffs 1 to 3 submit that their mother Smt.Raj Kumari married Shri Pran Nath Nangia on 12.12.1963 at Delhi according to Hindu Rites and Customs. It is stated that out of the said wedlock the plaintiffs were respectively born.

(3.) The defendants have filed a written statement. The defendants have submitted that late Shri Pran Nath Nangia is the husband of defendant No.1 Smt.Krishna Kumari Nangia and the said late Shri Pran Nath Nangia and defendant No.1 got married on 20th January, 1949. The defendants No.2 to 4 are the daughters of late Shri Pran Nath Nangia and defendant No.1. It is stated that on the death of late Shri Pran Nath Nangia the defendants have inherited the rights to the suit property. It is stated that the said Smt.Raj Kumari mother of the plaintiffs is actually the wife of Shri Krishan Lal Batra. Smt. Raj Kumari is said to have also claimed that Late Shri Pran Nath Nangia had executed a Will in her favour though the Will is a forged and fabricated one. It is pointed out that said Smt.Raj Kumari mother of the plaintiffs filed a suit bearing No.429/1985 which was pending in the Court of Shri M.K.Gupta ,the then Sub-Judge First Class, where she has stated that there was a Will executed allegedly in her favour by Late Shri Pran Nath Nangia dated 4.3.1984. Nothing is stated above about the outcome of the said suit by the parties. It is further stated that in view of the conduct of the said Smt.Raj Kumari mother of the plaintiffs, defendants were forced to file an appropriate Suit seeking a declaration to the effect that the defendants are owner/landlord of the suit property and that Smt. Raj Kumari mother of the plaintiff has no right or interest in the suit property.