VEENA TULI Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR TULI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR the purposes of deciding the instant appeal we have considered the record of the suit which has been sent to this Court as per practice directions issued. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appeal may be heard today itself and no date for hearing of the appeal be fixed as contemplated by sub -Rule 1 of Rule 11 of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) KRISHAN Kumar Tuli filed a suit being CS (OS) No. 682/2012 for partition in respect of freehold property bearing No. 8637, Feroz Street, Gaushala Marg, Kishan Ganj, Delhi -110006 (in short 'the suit property') claiming 5/6th share therein. In the suit Krishan Kumar Tuli did not implead the four sisters and only impleaded the legal heirs of Rajinder Tuli, that is, Veena Tuli, Kapil Tuli, Shivali Tuli and Deepak Tuli (Deepak Tuli was wrongly mentioned as wife of Rajinder Tuli) as Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 respectively. In the plaint it was pleaded that M.L. Tuli, father of Krishan Kumar Tuli and Rajinder Tuli was the sole and absolute owner of the property having purchased and constructed the same out of his own funds and resources. Since wife of M.L. Tuli, Ms. Agya Wati Tuli pre -deceased him and M.L. Tuli died intestate on May 11, 1998 the property devolved on his six legal heirs, that is, two sons and four daughters namely Krishan Kumar Tuli, Rajinder Tuli, Ms. Nirmal Kohli, Ms. Sudesh Sabharwal, Ms. Vinod Kohli and Ms. Santosh Soni, each inheriting 1/6th share in the suit property. On November 23, 2009 Rajinder Tuli son of M.L. Tuli passed away leaving behind his wife Veena Tuli, two sons Kapil and Deepak and daughter Shivali as his legal heirs.

(3.) A common written statement was filed by the defendants stating about the previous litigations between the parties and the various orders passed. It was stated that the plaint was liable to be dismissed for not production of the original title documents and site plan of the suit property, non -joinder of all the legal heirs of M.L. Tuli, that is, four sisters named above, documents filed by Krishan Kumar Tuli were fabricated and that the movable assets of M.L. Tuli, that is, cash, gold jewellery, bank accounts, fixed deposits were not disclosed which have been misappropriated by Krishan Kumar Tuli and the four sisters. The execution of the relinquishment deeds executed by the four sisters was denied and it was further contended that the said deeds were not registered and stamped. It was pleaded that Krishan Kumar Tuli was not entitled to any decree of partition of 5/6th share in the suit property till the veracity of the four release deeds were not ascertained. The possession and occupation of Krishan Kumar Tuli in the suit property was admitted by the defendants.