ASHOK ALAGH Vs. NEELAM ALAGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit for partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction. The suit is filed by the plaintiff Sh. Ashok Alagh. Defendants in the suit are the widow and children of late Sh. Subhash Alagh who was the brother of the plaintiff. Plaintiff claims 50% ownership rights and hence partition of his 1/2 share in the suit property No. N -215, ground floor flat, G.K. -I, New Delhi. The suit property is an old construction of 1967 and is situated on a plot of land admeasuring 313 sq yds. Originally the plaintiff and Sh. Subhash Alagh, the late husband of the defendant No. 1 were the two owners of the suit property inasmuch as the father Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh; the father of the plaintiff and Sh. Subhash Alagh; was the owner of the property and which property had devolved upon the father Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh from his wife Smt. Soma Rani Alagh. Smt. Soma Rani Alagh had bequeathed the suit property to her husband Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh by the Will dated 19.3.1984. Smt. Soma Rani Alagh pre -deceased Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh on 8.11.1985. Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh bequeathed the suit property half and half to the plaintiff and Sh. Subhash Alagh by his Will dated 15.7.1986. Sh. Gulzari Lal Alagh died on 25.6.1991. Plaintiff is residing in U.K. for 29 years before filing of the suit in the year 2006. As per the plaintiff his brother Sh. Subhash Alagh had agreed to pay him the value of his half share in the suit property however Sh. Subhash Alagh has backed out. Plaintiff therefore claims partition and rendition of accounts with respect to his half share in the suit property.

(2.) Defendants filed their written statement and contested the claim of the plaintiff and denied that the plaintiff any longer has half ownership rights in the suit property. The defendants in the written statement have pleaded that between the brothers late Sh. Subhash Alagh and the plaintiff, a Family Settlement was signed on 18.2.1999 as a result of which it was agreed that plaintiff would be paid his half share by taking the market value of the property as on the date of Family Settlement being 18.2.1999 vide para 4 of the family settlement. The payment to the plaintiff was to be made within six months to one year as per para 5 of the family settlement. It is stated that late Sh. Subhash Alagh during his lifetime, paid different amounts from the year 1999 to 2005, either directly to the plaintiff or to Ms. Kanchan Tuli who is the sister of the parties and who was the attorney of the plaintiff. It be noted that even the present suit has been filed by the sister Ms. Kanchan Tuli as the attorney of the plaintiff. In the written statement, the defendants have pleaded that the plaintiff has deliberately concealed not only the factum of a Family Settlement dated 18.2.1999 entered into between him and late Sh. Subhash Alagh but also that payments pursuant to the settlement were made by Sh. Subhash Alagh to the plaintiff and his attorney Ms. Kanchan Tuli on various dates during the years 1999 to 2005. Defendants have also pleaded that besides the plaintiff has resorted to filing a false suit and which has been filed deliberately after the death of Sh. Subhash Alagh so as to prejudice the defendants who may not have had the documents and other factual details which would have been much more easily available to Sh. Subhash Alagh for defending the false suit of the plaintiff.

(3.) Plaintiff in the replication filed admitted to the existence of and the execution of the documents being the Family Settlement dated 18.2.1999, however, it is pleaded by the plaintiff that a further and a final settlement agreement was envisaged in terms of the Family Settlement dated 18.2.1999 to be thereafter entered into but that final agreement was never entered into because market price of the property at the time of MOU was not settled. It is also pleaded in the replication that no consideration in terms of the MOU/Family Settlement dated 18.2.1999 was received by the plaintiff. It is also pleaded in the replication by the plaintiff that payments stated to have been made by late Sh. Subhash Alagh to the plaintiff during 1999 to 2005 are absolutely manipulated, baseless, false, frivolous, bogus, misconceived and mala fide. Plaintiff has also denied that value of the suit property was Rs. 20 lacs in February, 1999 as was the case of the defendants as per the written statement. Plaintiff however conceded in the replication that the plaintiff received a sum of Rs. 70,000/ - and Rs. 1,58,960/ - from late Sh. Subhash Alagh through bank payments. It is claimed that late Sh. Subhash Alagh failed to make the payment in time and in lumpsum basis and therefore the payments made of Rs. 70,000/ - and Rs. 1,58,960/ - stood forfeited.