ANITA CHOPRA HASANWALIA Vs. SUNITA CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (I) This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant no. 2 in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 17. 11. 2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondents/plaintiffs for partition etc with respect to the property J5/71, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi.

(2.) The suit as originally filed sought relief of partition of the suit property on the ground that suit property was HUF property having been purchased from HUF funds and that as per the oral family settlement the second floor of the suit property was given to the husband of the respondent no. 1/plaintiff no. 1, however, this aspect and pleading could not be proved and hence qua this cause of action, and with respect to which issue no. 1 was framed was held against the respondents/plaintiffs. The suit was however decreed because the suit property was owned by the defendant no. 1 who died pendente lite, and it was held that defendant no. 1 died intestate because the appellant/defendant no. 2 failed to prove the Will dated 2 8. 2007 alleged to have been executed by the defendant no. 1 in favour of the appellant/defendant no. Once the defendant no. 1 died intestate, respondent nos. 2 and 3/plaintiff nos. 2 and 3 in the suit being the children/legal heirs of a pre-deceased son, were therefore held entitled to jointly 50% ownership interest in the suit property as they were legal heirs of the grandmother/defendant no. 1, in view of Sections 15 and 16 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

(3.) In the suit issues were framed and parties led evidence, and which aspects are recorded in paras 5 to 9 of the impugned judgment and these paras read as under:-