NARESH GUPTA & ANR. vs SH NIKHIL @ NIKHIL KUMAR & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 28thFebruary 2025 Pronounced on: 02nd April 2025 + CS(OS) 20/2022 & CC 15/2023 I.A. 721/2022 NARESH GUPTA & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. A. Maitri, Ms. Radhika Chandrashekhar and Mr. Arnav Mudgal, Advocates. versus SH NIKHIL @ NIKHIL KUMAR & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. M.A. Khan, Adv. for D-1 with D-1 in person. Mr. Vikas Gautam, Adv. for D-3 & 4. Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, Ms. Saumya Soni, Mr. Vishal Vaid, Advocates for D- 4/DDA (through VC). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL JUDGMENT I.A. 17101/2023 (Application under Order VII Rule 11 Read with Section 151 CPC) 1. This application has been filed, under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’), by defendant no. 1. It is contended by defendant no. 1 that the suit filed by the plaintiffs is based upon a forged Will dated 17th February 2002. 2. The plaint was filed seeking a decree of partition, declaration and injunction in respect of rights in property No. 144, Deepali, Pitampura Delhi- 110034. (‘Suit Property’) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR I.A. 17101/23 in CS(OS) 20/2022 Page 1 of 20 Signing Date:04.04.2025 18:25:47 Submissions by counsel for defendant no. 1 3. The application is focused on the fact that reference to this Will was not made previously, and conspicuous by its absence, in either of the following situations: i. The first round of litigation initiated by plaintiffs and defendant no. 2 and 3, against the father of parties (late Surendra Prakash Gupta) and defendant No. 1. The plaintiffs and defendant no. 2-3 had claimed to be co-owners of the suit property and had filed a civil suit, being Suit No. 142/1995, which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 28th November 1995. ii. Against the s