Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS DJ-626-25
AKHLAQ AHMED VS AASIA& Ors
24.11.2025
Present : Ld counsel for plaintiff through VC.
Ld counsel for defendant NO.1 to 8.
Ld counsel for defendant No.9 to 11 through VC.
An application u/s 151 CPC stand filed on behalf of
plaintiff seeking correction w.r.t parentage of defendant No 3 to 8 as of
Allahrakha in place of Abdul Salam.
As the application is formal in nature and the same is also
not objected by the counsel for defendant No. 1 to 8, accordingly, in these
circumstances, the present application stands allowed without inviting
any reply from the other side.
Arguments on the application u/o 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC stand
heard from both the sides.
Brief facts necessary for disposal of the application are as
under :-
1. It is stated that Sh. Allahrakha alleged predecessor in
interest for all the parties to the suit was earlier married
to Smt Gafuran and from the said wedlock defendant
No.2, deceased husband of defendant No.1 and deceased
father of defendant No. 3 to 8 were born.
-- 1 of 4 --
2. It is also submitted that after the demise of his wife
Gafuran, Allahrakha married to defendant No.9 and
from the said wedlock the plaintiff and defendant No.10
& 11 were born.
3. It is also submitted that Allahrakha during his life time
was the owner of the suit property bearing No. 2206B,
Gali Shankar Wali, Sita Ram Bazar, Delhi-06 and the
property has not been partitioned between the parties to
the suit.
4. As far as defendant No.1 to 8 are concerned, they have
taken a stand to the effect that Sh Allahrakha never
married twice but only married to Smt Gafuran and out
of said wedlock defendant No.1 to 8 were the offerings
and as far as defendant No. 9 to 11 are concerned, they
are strangers to Allahrakaha as well as to the suit
property & taking the advantage to the fact that the name
of husband of defendant no.9 and father of defendant No.
10 to 11 was also Allahrakha, they have filed the present
suit and in order to take advantage of the same, having no
connection with Allahrakha or to the defendant No.1 1 to
8 or the suit property.
-- 2 of 4 --
5. It is also submitted that defendant No.1 to 8 that part of
the suit property has been sold out, however, during the
course of submission, Ld counsel for defendant No.1 to 8
submitted that it was an inadvertent mistake in the WS,
whereas actually the entire suit property has been sold
out even prior to filing of the present suit.
6. As far as defendant No. 9 to 11 are concerned, they have
supported the case of the plaintiff.
In this background as discussed above, the court is of
the opinion that when the parentage of the plaintiff and
defendant No.10 & 11 qua marriage of defendant No.9
with Allahrakaha who is stated to be the ancestor of
defendant No.1 to 8, is challanged by defendant No. 1 to
8, it is first and foremost requirement on behalf of
plaintiff to prove that Allahrakha who is stated to be
ancestor of defendant No.1 to 8 was also very same
person as their ancestor.
In these circumstances, till the time the said fact is
proved by the plaintiff, no interim order can be passed
qua defendant No. 1 to 8 who have already sold out the
suit property.
-- 3 of 4 --
Accordingly, court deems it fit to frame preliminary
issue in the present case and invite the plaintiff to lead
evidence on the same:-
Whether Allaharakha who is stated to be the father of
defendant No.1 & 2 and grand father of defendant No.
3 to 8 is the same person which is stated to be the
father of plaintiff, defendant No.10 & 11 and husband
of defendant No.9? OPP.
It is also stated that in the meanwhile the defendant
No.1 to 8 are directed to place on record the copy of sale
deed of the suit property and supply the same to the ld
counsel for plaintiff against acknowledgement.
Put up for evidence on this issue now on 27.01.2025.
(Vinay Singhal)
District Judge-09 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
24.11.2025
-- 4 of 4 --