ARUN KUMAR vs SUBHASH CHAND & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 17th November, 2025 + CS(OS) 234/2023 with I.A. 6925/2023, I.A. 26018/2023, I.A. 4080/2024, I.A. 6502/2024, I.A. 37245/2024 & I.A. 38252/2024 ARUN KUMAR .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Arun Kumar, Plaintiff through VC. versus SUBHASH CHAND & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Mahmood Hasan, Md. Shoaib Mahmood and Ms. Nazia Khan, Advocates for D-1 and D-2. Mr. Amit Mishra, Advocate for D-6. D-6 present-in-person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral) I.A. 26018/2023 (u/O-VII Rule 11 of the CPC) 1. The present application has been filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter ‘CPC’) on behalf of the defendants no.1 and 2 seeking rejection of plaint. 2. Notice in this application was accepted by the plaintiff appearing in person on 22nd January 2024. 3. Reply has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff. 4. The present suit has been filed inter alia seeking reliefs of declaration and partition of the movable properties including gold articles and vehicles Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CS(OS) 234/2023 Page 1 of 10 By:AANCHAL TAGGAR Signing Date:22.11.2025 15:57:35 and various immovable properties. 5. The defendants no.1 and 2 are the plaintiff’s father and mother respectively and the defendants no.3 to 5 are his sisters. The plaintiff seeks partition of the aforesaid movable and immovable properties on the ground that the said properties are joint family properties. 6. The ground taken on behalf of the defendants no.1 and 2 in the present application is that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action for the reliefs claimed against the defendants inasmuch as there are no pleadings in the plaint with regard to the creation, existence and contin