(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Sec. 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, ('Act of 1966') challenging the impugned order dtd. 18/12/2023, passed in CS (OS) No. 657/2017, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the I.A. No. 8954/2023 filed by the Appellants herein under Chapter IX Rule 6 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 ('DHC Rules') read with Sec. 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'). Brief facts
(2.) The Appellants herein are the plaintiffs and the Respondents are the defendants. The civil suit has been filed by the Appellants herein seeking declaration, partition and permanent injunction. The parties herein are the lineal descendants of late Sh. Lo Ram, who died intestate on 14/5/2001 leaving behind several immoveable properties.
(3.) Learned counsel for the Appellants states that the entire basis of the rejection of the earlier I.A. No. 8118/2020 by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench, was the existence of the mutation order dtd. 18/2/2002; and with the setting aside of the said order, the reliance of the Respondents to prove oral partition based on the said mutation order does not survive for consideration. She states that since the ownership of late Sh. Lo Ram of the immoveable properties is admitted, the Appellants herein are entitled to a decree of partition forthwith without awaiting trial. She states that the plea of oral partition set up by the Respondents is not a legally admissible plea and there is therefore, no justification for holding a fullfledged trial.