SURESH CHAND GUPTA Vs. MAN MOHAN GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary decree was passed by this court on 10.09.2003 for the suit property No.A -44, Inder Puri, New Delhi whereby the four plaintiffs and defendant No.1 were to have equal share in the property (1/5th share each). Against the said order, defendant No.1 filed an RFA(OS)No.43/2003. The same was compromised between the parties and a compromise decree was passed on 06.02.2012 whereby the share of defendant No.1 was agreed to be 30% and plaintiffs No. 1, 2 and 3(A) to 3(C) were to respectively get 23.33% (i.e. 3A to 3C got 23.33%) Defendant No.1 challenged the compromise decree in the Supreme Court by filing a special leave petition which was dismissed on 29.10.2012. Thereafter he filed a review petition before the Division Bench which was also dismissed on 22.02.2013. He again preferred a special leave petition against the said order which was dismissed on 26.08.2013.

(2.) THIS court vide order dated 01.05.2014 appointed Ms.Vandana Anand, Advocate as a Local Commissioner to visit the suit property and suggest mode of partition and in case it is not feasible to divide the property by metes and bounds, a specific report in this regard was to be submitted within four weeks. Against the said order dated 01.05.2014 again defendant No.1 went up in appeal being FAO(OS) 327/2014. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on 22.07.2014.

(3.) THE Local Commissioner has visited the suit property and submitted her report dated 16.07.2014. She has noted that the suit property is vacant with no structure or building. She has concluded that it is not feasible to divide the suit property by metes and bounds.