SNEH GUPTA Vs. VERSHA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A very short question is the issue in controversy pertaining to refusal to issue directions on the report of the Local Commissioner for installation of separate water connection in the present petition.

(2.) A brief history of the issue in hand originates with the father-in-law of petitioner no. 1 who is also grandfather to petitioner no. 2, namely Harbans Lal Pamneja was the owner of the property bearing No. C-167, Dayanand Colony, consisting of ground floor, 1st floor and 2nd floor with terrace (hereinafter referred to as 'suit property'). Harbans Lal Pamneja expired on 10/7/2015 and his wife Laj Kumari @ Laj Wanti expired on 22/10/2018, they died intestate and after their death, the petitioner no. 1 got 50% share in the property and respondent no. 1 got the rest 50% share in all movable and immovable properties.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioners that respondents created nuisance and hindered the free movement of the petitioners in the suit property by throwing garbage in the common courtyard, locking the main gate of the suit property etc. This led to the petitioner herein filing a suit for partition, rendition of account, mandatory and permanent injunction thereby praying for partition of the property, restraining the respondents from resorting to illegal tactics.