A.SLP C Nos.13376 77/2019 Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2018 passed in CIS No.11193 of 2016, the appellant defendant has filed first appeal in F.A.No.641 of 2018 before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
On his demise, the suit property was devolved upon his wife Smt.
yards.
Though, the suit was for partition of the second floor and terrace rights, it is the appellant defendant, who in the written statement, raised a dispute in respect of companymon areas in the ground floor also.
The directions issued by the High Court read as under The appellant defendant will number have a right to use the small driveway on the ground floor of the property.
The house property bearing No.
The Trial Court also ordered to put up the said property for sale by auction, and distribute the sale proceeds in equal share.
OPP ii Whether the companymon areas in the suit property are liable to be partitioned in terms of paragraph number14 of the written statement?
The appellant defendant will however have easementary right to use the water pipes and booster pump at the rear companyrtyard, which are the water pipes and booster pump, and which feed the first floor and second floor of the suit property falling to the share of the appellant defendant.
D 1090, New Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Friends Colony, New Delhi, companystructed in a plot area GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA Date 2020.03.02 171213 IST Reason of 292 sq.
The Regular First Appeal filed by the appellant defendant is disposed of by the impugned judgment by the High Court of Delhi, by setting aside the judgment of the Trial Court, to the extent of directions for sale of second floor and terrace rights and issued further directions in respect of the companymon areas.
In view of the claim set up by the appellant defendant in respect of the companymon areas, the following issues were framed in the suit for trial A.SLP C Nos.13376 77/2019 Whether the second floor and the terrace above of property No.
OPD iii Relief The Trial Court by companysidering the pleadings and evidence on record, has negatived the claim of the appellant defendant for the companymon areas, as claimed in para 14 of the written statement.
My both sons shall number sell their share in the property to an outsider without companycurrence of each other and shall first offer to the other before taking any step in that regard.
Subsequently, the mother also passed away by executing a Will dated 27.01.2005.
Rajan Sethi, first floor shall fall to the exclusive share of A.SLP C Nos.13376 77/2019 my son Sh.
The relevant portion of the Will executed by the mother, reads as under House No.
On the claim of the respondent plaintiff for partition of second floor and terrace rights, by accepting objections of the respondent plaintiff to the Report of the Court Commissioner, the Trial Court held that the second floor and the terrace rights cannot be partitioned by metes and bounds and, thus, final decree of partition was passed, granting equal share of 50 each in the second floor and the terrace rights.
As per the Will dated 27.01.2005, the ground floor portion is bequeathed to the respondent plaintiff, the first floor portion was bequeathed to the appellant defendant and the second floor portion was to be divided equally between the parties, with the front half portion to the share of appellant defendant and the back half portion to the share of respondent plaintiff.
Rajan Sethi.
The appellant defendant, however, has number filed any companynter claim in the suit.
Sajan Sethi.
Krishna Sethi, who is the mother of the parties herein, pursuant to a Will executed by their father.
D 1090, New Friends Colony, New Delhi was partitioned and if number, whether the Plaintiff is entitled to partition of the same by metes and bounds?
D 1090, situated in New Friends Colony, New Delhi, companystructed in a plot area of 292 sq.yards, was originally owned by the father of the parties, late Sh.
Sajan Sethi and half back portion shall go to the exclusive share of my elder son Sh.
D 1090, New Friends Colony, New Delhi shall devolve upon my both sons Shri Rajan Sethi Shri Sajan Sethi in the following manner Ground Floor shall fall to the exclusive share of my elder son Sh.
The front half portion shall go to the exclusive share of my son Sh.
The respondent plaintiff i.e. Sh.
Top floor shall be divided by my children in equal share.
The booster pump motor installed at ground floor shall be used by both the children without any interference obstruction by any of them in any manner what so ever.
The review petition filed by the appellant also ended in dismissal, as such, these are A.SLP C Nos.13376 77/2019 the two appeals, one against the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2019 and other appeal against an order dismissing the review petition vide order dated 15.04.2019.
SUBHASH REDDY,J. Leave granted.
These civil appeals are filed by the defendant in the Suit, aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2019 passed by the High Court of Delhi in F.A.No.641 of 2018, arising out of a partition suit with respect to the property bearing No.
As per the preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court share of the respondent plaintiff and defendant was decided in the ratio of 50 each.
Rajan Sethi filed a suit in CIS No.11193 of 2016 on the file of Additional District Judge, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi, for partition and permanent injunction of the second floor and the terrace rights.
