KANAN BAKSHI Vs. SH. ATUL BALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Plaintiff seeks a decree for partition for dividing the suit property in which she claims a 2/3, shares and states that the balance 1/3 share belong to Defendants 1 and 2.

(2.) THE facts as set out in the plaint are that one Nand Kishore Datta, the Plaintiff's father had purchased Plot No.104, Block B-1, Janak Puri, New Delhi, measuring 126 sq.mtrs., through Perpetual leave deed dated 5.6.1969, through the Delhi Development Authority(DDA). During his life time Shri Datta constructed a three storied structure on the plot. The said Sh. Datta was married to Ms. Shiv Kumari Datta. They had two children namely, the Plaintiff and one Ms. Kamini Bali.

(3.) ON the basis of the above affidavit it is averred that the Plaintiff applied for conversation of the property into free-hold which was permitted by the DDA and the Conveyance Deed was executed on 31.5.2007. The Plaintiff also alleges that during the life time of Smt. Shiv Kumar Datta the Defendants had not raised any disputes concerning mutation of the property in her name and that they started objecting to the mutation after death on of Shiv Kumari Datta, 6.2.2005. It is alleged that the Defendants complained to the DDA, about legality of the mutation and the latter caused a notice to be issued on 19.7.2007 for determining the lease deed and for cancellation of mutation. The Plaintiff further alleged that in her reply to the DDA on 3.8.2007, she admitted to mistaken advice and did not want to deprive the Defendants of their legal entitlements. It is further alleged that Shiv Kumar Datta did not want to give any share or rights in the suit prperty to the Defendants due to the conduct of their father, i.e the husband of late Smt. Kamini Bali.