ADITI UPADHYAY Vs. LALIT KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject suit being decided by the present judgment is a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and partition filed by Smt. Aditi Upadhyay against her two brothers Mr. Lalit Kumar and Mr. Mahesh Kumar; defendants no.1 and 2, the sister Ms. Kamlesh Kumar Gola; defendant no.3 and defendant no.4/Smt. Vidyawati the mother of the plaintiff as also of the other parties. Defendant no.4 died during the pendency of the present suit. As per the suit plaint, the plaintiff states that either it be declared that there was an oral family settlement dated 22.4.1999 by which plaintiff was made the owner of the property bearing no. R-298, IInd Floor, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi or that there should be a decree of partition with respect to this Greater Kailash Property and another property bearing no.U-11, Green Park, New Delhi. The plaintiff claims that these two properties belonged to her father (and defendant nos.1 to 3) and since the father died intestate she succeeds to a share in these properties as the heir of her father Sh. O.P. Kumar.

(2.) (i). The case of the plaintiff as per the plaint is that the entire Greater Kailash property was originally owned by her grandfather Sh. Hira Lal. As per the para 3 of the plaint, Sh. Hira Lal during his life time partitioned his Greater Kailash property among his four sons and the share of his one son Sh. O.P. Kumar, father of the plaintiff, was as per the request of Sh. O.P. Kumar instead of being given to Sh. O.P. Kumar was bequeathed to the two sons of Sh. O.P. Kumar i.e defendant nos. 1 and 2. This Will of the grandfather Sh. Hira Lal is dated 24.9.1986. The plaintiff therefore pleads that though this property was bequeathed by the grandfather to her brothers/defendant nos.1 and 2, yet, this property really belonged to the father Sh.O.P. Kumar as bequeathing of this property by the grandfather to the defendants no. 1 and 2 was for the actual ownership of Sh. O.P. Kumar.

(3.) (i). The sister of the plaintiff i.e defendant no.3 has supported the case of the defendant nos. 1 and 2 and there is a common written statement filed by defendant nos. 2 and 3. Defendant nos. 1 and 4 have filed a common written statement.