TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 732X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd distribution of sale proceeds amongst the parties as per their shares declared in the preliminary decree for partition. The parties shall however, before putting the property to sale to an outsider, be entitled to make inter se bids amongst themselves, with the highest bidder paying the value of the share/s of other/s. The Gift Deeds aforesaid are also declared to be null and void to the extent inconsistent with the shares declared in the preliminary decree for partition. - CS(OS) 280/2011 & IAs No.1926/2011 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) & 15149/2012 (of D-1 u/O XXXIX R-4 CPC) - - - Dated:- 6-4-2018 - MR. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW J. Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Naresh Thanai and Ms. Khushboo Singh, Advs. Defendants Through: Ms. Anisha Mahaj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the defendant No.5 Neelam Gajri is the daughter of defendant No.1 H.L. Sud; (v) that the plaintiffs No.2 3 Pradeep Sood and Pramod Sood are the sons of plaintiff No.1 Dev Chander Sood and defendant No.3 Ashish Sud is the son of defendant No.2 Swantantra Prakash Sud; (vi) that House No.E-2, South Extension Part-I was purchased for the benefit of the family; therefore sale deed was got executed in the name of defendant No.1; after the plot was purchased, a single storey house was constructed in the year 1961 and first and second floors were added in 1975-76; (vii) that the plaintiffs also contributed towards the cost of construction; (viii) that the property was purchased and constructed from the funds of Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the filing of the present suit; (xvii) that the defendant No.1, in the advance copy of the written statement served on the counsel for the plaintiffs disclosed execution of (a) Gift Deed dated 20th March, 2009 registered on 21st March, 2009 with Sub Registrar-V, New Delhi vide Registration Number 3136, Additional Book No.I, Volume No.9140 at Pages 190 to 199, gifting 1/3rd suit property to defendant No.2 Swatantra Prakash Sud, (b) Gift Deed dated 13th April, 2009 registered on 15th April, 2009 with Sub Registrar-V, New Delhi vide Registration Number 4143, Additional Book No.I, Volume No.9181 at Pages 14 to 22, gifting 1/3rd suit property to defendant No.5 Neelam Gajri; and, (c) Gift Deed dated 24th April, 2009 registered on 27th April, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the defendants. 6. The counsel for the plaintiffs has drawn attention to page 6 of the Part III file being the order dated 3rd August, 1965 of the Income Tax Officer of assessment for the year 1964-65 of Shri Kishori Lal as HUF with three minor coparceners and showing the house situated at New Delhi as one of the properties of the HUF. It is stated that the HUF had no other property at New Delhi except property No.E-2, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi. The said order has been proved as Ex.PW1/1. 7. The counsel for the plaintiffs has also drawn attention to the assessment order of the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 1977-78 of Shri Kishori Lal HUF expressly mentioning the income of the HUF from property No.E-2, N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... personal assets of Sh. H.L. Sud after his demise. Sh. H.L. Sud has full right to change the above share, any decision or investments as long as he is alive and any for the investments will be with his consent. 3. HUF assets consist of house at E-2, South Ext.I, New Delhi, PPF A/c at SBI, South Ext.-II, BOB A/c, Hundai Car, personal assets consist of investments as below: 1. Various fixed deposits and saving A/c at PO Kidwai Nagar. 2. Fixed deposits at OBC Bank, South Ext. 3. Cash in Safe. 4. ₹ 150,000/- at SBI Sav A/c with S.L. Sud and S.P. Sud. 5. __Share of 2 commercial plots of 90 sq. yds. Each at Baltan a which are in the name of Sh. D.C. Sud. 6. 2/3 share from 2 plots (commercial) in Dhakoli, Pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the claim of the plaintiffs qua the property being of HUF having been dealt with. Rather, the counsel for the defendants, by putting Ex.PW1/D1 to the plaintiff No.1, has proved the said document and which is executed by the defendant No.1 as well and which contains an admission of the subject property being of the HUF. 14. The counsel for the defendants has argued that the plaintiff No.1 was thrown out from the HUF since he had sold some other properties of the HUF. It is further contended that the suit does not cover the other properties of the HUF. 15. Once the right of the defendants to file written statement has been closed, all the said defences are not open to the defendants. 16. The counsel for the plaintiffs gives up th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
