JYOTI WAZIR & ORS. vs DEEPAK KHOSLA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on: 04.04.2025 + CS(OS) 1194/2003 JYOTI WAZIR & ORS. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Narender Lodiwal and Mr. Wasim Ashraf, Advs. versus DEEPAK KHOSLA & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manish Kumar and Mr. Varun Kapur, Advs. for D-1 to D-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN JUDGMENT VIKAS MAHAJAN, J. 1. The question with which this Court is confronted in the present judgment is whether the issues which were framed vide order dated 26.09.2011 covered the amended plaint or whether additional issues need to be framed, which if framed would require leading of additional evidence in respect thereof. 2. To find an answer to the above question, it is necessary to appreciate the background facts of the case. 3. The property bearing number 11, Prithvi Raj Road, New Delhi was owned by Late Sh. R.N. Khosla, who had two sons namely Sh. K.G. Khosla Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) No.1194/2003 Page 1 of 33 By:DEEPAK SINGH Signing Date:05.04.2025 19:38:54 and Sh. J.C. Khosla. The contesting parties in the present suit for partition are the heirs of Late Sh. K.G. Khosla. The plaintiffs are the three daughters of Late Sh. K.G. Khosla, whereas the Defendant No.1 is his son. When the suit was originally filed, it was filed by the Plaintiff No.1 as the sole plaintiff. Subsequently, the two other daughters of Late Sh. K.G. Khosla, who had been originally arrayed as Defendant Nos.4 and 5, were transposed as Plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 vide order dated 18.04.2006. Defendants No.2 & 3 are the sons of Defendant No.1. The Defendant No.4 (originally Defendant No.6) is the aforesaid Sh. J.C. Khosla. 4. Late Sh. R.N. Khosla during his lifetime executed a Gift Dee