AMITA GANDOAK vs HARKIRAT SINGH SODHI AND ANOTHER

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 11.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 20.11.2025 + RFA(OS) 25/2024 AMITA GANDOAK .....Appellant Through: Mr. Jai Sahai Endlaw and Ms. Sagarika Kaul, Advs. versus HARKIRAT SINGH SODHI AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelima Tripathi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajat Asija, Ms. Kirti Sharma, Mr. G. Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of judgment dated 07.05.2024 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Judgment‟] passed by the Learned Single Judge [hereinafter referred as “LSJ”], wherein an application filed by the Respondents [Defendants before the LSJ] under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as „CPC‟] was allowed and the plaint filed by the Appellant [Plaintiff before LSJ] was rejected. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties before this Court shall be referred to in accordance with their status before the LSJ. Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:20.11.2025 RFA(OS) 25/2024 Page 1 of 16 17:06:23 FACTUAL MATRIX 3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, it is imperative to cull out the genealogy of the family and the relevant background facts, which are set forth hereinafter. 4. The genealogy of the family reads as under- 5. The Plaintiff instituted a civil suit being CS(OS) 90/2017 seeking partition of as many as seven properties mentioned below [hereinafter referred to as “suit properties”] from her paternal side. paragraph no.1 of the plaint filed by the Plaintiff reads as under: “1). That by way of the present suit, the plaintiff is seeking partition of the fol