Delhi High Court · 2025-03-03
SH. SUBHASH CHANDRA JARODIA vs SH. VIJAYINDER KUMAR & ORS.
- Citation / case number
- CS(OS)-441/2023 2025:DHC:1399
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- SH. SUBHASH CHANDRA JARODIA
- Respondent
- SH. VIJAYINDER KUMAR & ORS.
Judgment text excerpt
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 24th January 2025. Pronounced on: 03rd March 2025. + CS(OS) 441/2023, I.A. 13786/2023, I.A. 29995/2024, I.A. 32144/2024 &I.A. 1216/2025 SH. SUBHASH CHANDRA JARODIA .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Vikramjeet Singh Ranga, Adv. along with Plaintiff in-person. versus SH. VIJAYINDER KUMAR & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Ashutosh Nagar, Mr. Ishan Harlalka and Mr. Kunal Taneja, Advs. for D-1. Mr. Himanshu Sachdeva and Mr. Ashish Kumar Yadav, Advocates forD- 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL JUDGMENT ANISH DAYAL, J. I.A. 29995/2024 (Application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC) 1. This application has been filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (‘CPC’) by defendant no.1 for rejection of the plaint. Signature Not Verified CS(OS) 441/2023 Page 1 of 16 Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:03.03.2025 19:01:13 2. The suit was filed by plaintiff for a declaration of the registered gift deed dated 06th September 2021, executed by Late Sh. Chander Bhan in favour of defendant no.1 in respect of the property bearing No. M-111, Saket, New Delhi- 110017 (‘suit property’), as ‘null & void’, as well as declaring the registered Will dated 26th July 2017, executed by Late Sh. Chander Bhan in favour of defendant no.1 as ‘null & void’. Additionally, plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction restraining defendant no.1 from creating third-party rights over the said property. Late Sh. Chander Bhan passed away on 05th February 2023, at the age of 92, leaving behind Class I legal heirs – eldest son (plaintiff), younger son (defendant no.1), and three daughters (defendant nos.3-5). By the present application, defendant no.1 seeks rejection of the suit on the grounds that there was no cause of action, the suit