KANS KUMARI Vs. BELI RAM MEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Kans Kumari, wife of Sh. K.C. Khanna, filed a suit for declaration, possession and for recovery of Rs. 35,750.00 against Sh. Beli Ram Mehra and Ors. Suit is based primarily on the facts that the plaintiff and late Smt. Leela Wati were the daughters of late Smt. Dhan Devi, wife of Sh. Karam Chand Kapur. Smt.Dhan Devi purchased, in public auction, a property No. XI/ 3874-75 and 1453-54 (New) Gali Nimwali, Darya Gang, New Delhi. This property' was purchased by Smt. Dhan Devi against the compensation payable to her in lieu of properties left in Pakistan. Smt.Dhan Devi had also been allotted a flat No. A-IV/97(Part-l), Lajpat Nagar, under the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act (In short the "Act"). Smt.Dhan Devi was the sole owner of both these properties. Smt. Kans Kumari and late Smt. Leela Wati were the only legal heirs of Smt. Dhan Devi and late K.C. Kapur. Thus after the death of Smt. Dhan Devi, the plaintiff and Leela Wati acquired as equal shares in both these properties. Leela Wati died during the pendency of the suit. She was survived by defendant No. 1 her husband, defendant No. 2 her daughter and defendants 3 to 6 her sons. They were impleaded as defendants. Plaintiff, being one half owner of the properties is 'entitled to realise the income out of these properties. Defendants, successor in interest of late Smt. Leela Wati, have been illegally holding possession of these properties. They are realising the income out of these properties but not sharing the same with the plaintiff. The rent which the plaintiff estimates of Darya Ganj property comes to Rs. 500.00per month, half of which the plaintiff is entitled to. Defendants have also to render accounts and pay to the plaintiff her share She put her clailn atRs.35,750.00. Plaintiff being half owner entitled to partition of the properties and separate possession thereof.

(2.) Suit has been contested by the defendants, inter alia, on the grounds that property at Gali Neem Wali Darya Ganj was jointly purchased by Smt. Leela Wati and Smt. Dhan Devi. 51.03% share in the property at Darya Ganj belonged to Smt. Dhan Devi, and 48.7% to Leela Wati, after Leela Wati's death to the defendants her legal heirs. Therefore, so far as the share of Smt. Leela Wati is concerned the plaintiff has no right to claim in the same. So far as Lajpat Nagar property is concerned, Smt. Dhan Devi was owner to the extent of 10.34%, while defendant No. 1 is owner to the extent of 89.66%. Defendant No. 1 got the ownership rights in Lajpat Nagar property because of associating by placing his verified claims, with Smt. Dhan Devi. At best the plaintiff can claim one half share out of the share of late Smt. Dhan Devi in the property at Darya Ganj which comes to 25.06% and 5.17% interest in Lajpat Nagar plot. She can only claim this much share in these two properties. Plaintiff is not entitled to any rent or money as no rent is recovered from Lajpat Nagar property and the rent from Darya Ganj property is nominal. Replication was filed refuting these allegations. On the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed:- 1. What are the respective shares of the parties? 2. Is the plaintiff entitled to mesne profit in respect of properties in dispute? If so, how much? 3. Relief. Following additional issue was framed on 8th August, 1988:- I. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred under the provisions of - Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, as stated in the preliminary objections?

(3.) I have heard the oral submissions made by learned Counsel for the defendant and perused the documentary and oral evidence placed on record. From the perusal of the same, my finding on the above issues are as under:- . Issue No. 1