Delhi High Court Orders Handover of Property in Family Dispute

Must Read

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work,...

Follow us

On 10th September 2020, Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva heard the case of Dr Jai Mala Jain & Anr. v. Dr Ashwani Jain, via video-conferencing. The Court ordered the respondent to handover the possession of the subject premises.

Facts of the case

The parties, in this case, are siblings. The father of the parties passed away on 16th September 2017. Being a class-I legal heir, the respondent succeeded in the subject property as a legal heir. A suit for partition has been filed on the said premise. By the order dated 15th September 2017, the respondent had undertaken to vacate the premises on or before 31st January 2020. The petitioner seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for breach of the order dated 15th September 2017.

Arguments of the Petitioner

The learned counsel for the petitioner argues that there was a dispute between the respondent and the late father of the parties. The registered Will dated 15th May 2017 bequeathed the subject property in favour of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner is defending the Suit for the partition filed by the respondent. Moreover, in the said Suit, an application for an injunction has been filed. Nonetheless, no injunction has been granted in favour of the respondent. Furthermore, no Court has passed the order staying the operation of the order dated 15th September 2017. Therefore, the respondent is liable to handover the possession of the property in terms of the undertaking given to the Court. As the respondent failed to vacate by 31st January 2020, the petitioner has the right to claim charges for the same.

Arguments of the Respondent

The learned counsel for the respondent stated that the respondent undertakes to vacate and hand over the peaceful vacant possession of the subject premises to the petitioner on or before 31st October 2020. This is done without any prejudice to the rights and contentions in the Suit for partition or to the application for injunction filed by the respondent in the Suit.

Court’s Order

The Court accepts the undertaking of the respondent. It directs the respondent to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the subject premises on or before 31st October 2020. It is further clarified that this Court has not commented on the merits of the claim of the respondent or of the petitioner based on the alleged Will dated 15th May 2017.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work, except the drinking water component...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years old (victim) at their home....

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of the Applicant to release him...

Proof of Infliction of Fatal Injury Not Mandatory for Conviction Under Section 307, IPC: Tripura High Court

In the case of Mamin Miah vs the State of Tripura, a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S....

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -