USHA RANI vs SEEMA & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 27.01.2026 + FAO 383/2018 USHA RANI .....Appellant Through: Mr. R.M. Sinha, Mr. Prateek Sinha, Ms. Namita and Ms. Nandini, Advocates. versus SEEMA & ORS .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The present appeal, filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) CPC, impugns the order dated 04.07.2018 passed by the learned ADJ, East District, Karkardooma Courts, in Misc. DJ No. 1106/2016 [formerly CS(OS) No. 198/2011], whereby the Trial Court declined to initiate contempt proceedings against respondent no. 1 and declined to declare the Sale Deed dated 16.03.2011 qua the suit property as non est, the same having been entered into between the respondents/defendants after the passing of the injunction order dated 31.01.2011. 2. Briefly, the appellant, who is the plaintiff before the Trial Court, had preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. In the plaint, it was averred that the late Smt. Maya Devi, the mother of the appellant/plaintiff as well as respondent/defendant no. 1, had executed a Will dated 23.05.2008 in favour of respondent no. 1, which was sought to be Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI FAO 383/2018 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:03.02.2026 18:13:33 declared null and void; the plaintiff further prayed to be declared as joint owner of the suit property. The appellant/plaintiff also prayed for a restraint order against selling, transferring, and alienating the suit property. Initially, the suit was filed before this Court, and vide order dated 31.01.2011, an ex parte injunction was granted and the parties were directed to maintain status quo with respect to the title of the suit property till further orders. 3. The appellant/