PAMELA KUMAR Vs. CHANDRASHEKHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit as well as the probate case have been instituted by Mrs. Pamela Kumar. Both the matters were heard together on the preliminary issues framed therein. Since the facts are common to both the suit and the probate case, this common judgment shall dispose of the preliminary issues in both the matters.

(2.) THE suit is essentially one of partition and possession in respect of the property bearing No. 28, Fire Brigade Lane, New Delhi. Mrs. Pamela kumar (the plaintiff) claims a half share in the said suit property. On the basis of such claim she seeks a decree of partition and possession in respect of the said half share as also mesne profits against the defendant No. 1 (Mr. Chandrashekhar ). The other defendants, namely, Mr. Arun Mohan (defendant No. 2), Mrs Lalita Steinmetz (defendant No. 3), Mrs Mala Goel (defendant No. 4), the Land and Development Office (defendant No. 6) and the District Judge, Tis Hazari (defendant No. 7) are not contesting defendants. The defendant No. 5 had been deleted vide order dated 15. 10. 2001. In the suit the plaintiff ( Mrs. Pamela Kumar) has also sought a declaration that the decree dated 02. 09. 1966 in RFA No. 140-D/1962 is null and void.

(3.) THE probate case has been filed by Mrs. Pamela Kumar seeking probate of a purported Will of February 1954 alleged to have been executed by late Mr. Chandra Mohan Lal in favour of late Mr. Radhe Mohan Lal. Late mr. Chandra Mohan Lal and late Mr. Radhe Mohan Lal were brothers. The defendant No. 1 (Mr. Chandrashekhar) claims to be the adopted son of late mr. Chandra Mohan Lal and his wife late Mrs. Gomti Devi.