HARBIR SINGH YADAV vs SUMAN & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 28th JANUARY, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF: + I.A. No. 9218/2025 IN CS(OS) 651/2019 HARBIR SINGH YADAV .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Arun Baali and Ms. Arisha Ahmad, Advocates versus SUMAN & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. S.S.Parasher, Ms. Shruti Sharma, Advocate for Defendant No.1 to 5 Mr. Anish Dhingra, Mr. ArihantNowlkha, Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advs for D-7 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD JUDGMENT (ORAL) I.A. No. 9218/2025 1. This Application under Order XVIII Rule 1 of the CPC has been filed by the Plaintiff for a direction to the Defendants to lead evidence before the Plaintiff. 2. The instant Suit is one for partition of a property bearing Plot No. 143, Pocket-B, Sector-26, Rohini, Delhi, admeasuring 335 square metres (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Suit Property’). 3. The case set up by the Plaintiff is that the Suit Property was allotted by the Delhi Development Authority/Defendant No.7 herein (hereinafter Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARIOM CS(OS) 651/2019 Page 1 of 7 SINGH KIRMOLIYA Signing Date:30.01.2026 18:29:53 referred to as ‘the DDA’) to Late Shri Ram Mehar Yadav, who was father of the Plaintiff. It is stated that the Suit Property was mutated in the name of the father of the Plaintiff by the DDA. Thereafter,Shri Ram Mehar Yadav died intestate on 01.06.2010, leaving behind three legal heirs, namely the Plaintiff herein, another son - Late Satish Yadav, and daughter - Urmila Yadav (Defendant No.6 herein). It is stated that since Satish Yadav also passed away, his legal heirs, who are Defendants No.1 to 5 herein, have been impleaded in the array of parties. 4. It is stated that on the death of Late Shri Ram Mehar Yadav, his legal heirs, namely, the Plaintiff herein, Late Satish Yadav a