Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CS DJ 727/24 Harbans Lal Dhingra vs. Chaman Lal Dhingra
25.05.2026.
Present: Mr. Abhishek Sharma alongwith Mr. Himanshu, Ld.
Counsel for the plaintiff alongwith plaintiff.
Mr. Kapil D. Vishwakarma, Ld. Counsel for the defendant
Nos. 1 to 4.
Mr. Akshit Tomar, Ld. Counsel for the defendant No. 5.
Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for the defendantNos. 6 & 7
Vakalatnama is filed on behalf of defendant Nos. 6 & 7.
Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff presses for application under Order
39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC whereby temporary injunction is sought thereafter
restraining defendants from creating any 3rd party interest in the property i.e.
back portion of Ground Floor, measuring 214.50 Sq. Yds of H. No. D-1/25,
Model Town-II, Delhi-110009 (hereinafter called as suit property).
Application is opposed strongly. Record is perused carefully.
Plaintiff and the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 are the five brothers
whereas defendant Nos. 5 to 7 are children of their pre-deceased sister. It is
the case of the plaintiff that Amar Nath Dhingra who has been the brother of
the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and Late Smt. Laj Pahwa, had died
intestate on 01.02.2024 leaving behind no legal heirs and since he died
intestate and his wife also pre-deceased to him, so plaintiff is entitled for
share in the suit property besides defendant No. 1 to 4 and three children of Lt
Smt Laj Pahwa. All the defendants admit this fact that Mr. Amar Nath
Dhingra died intestate leaving behind no legal heirs since his wife also pre-
deceased him. Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 contested the suit and it is stated that
none of defendant Nos. 5 to 7 are entitled for any share as they fall in entry
IV of ‘Schedule- II’ of The Hindu Succession Act and not only this, Lt. Amar
Nath Dhingra during his lifetime purchased the entire property i.e. D-1/25,
Model Town-II, Delhi declaring that after his death, the entire property
admeasuring 460 Sq. Yards shall be devolved upon all his brother and sisters
in equal share and in order
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
to strength to the declaration, the property was purchased in three following
parts;
(i) Back portion of the Ground floor measuring 214.50 Dq.
Yars in his own name.
(ii) Front portion of the ground floor measuring 190 dq. Yards
in the name of sister’s son Mr. Puneet Pahwa (defendant
No. 5)
(iii) Terrace/roof rights in the name of plaintiff’s son Mr. Atul
Dhingra on same date i.e. 23.01.1995.
It is also contended that entire suit property has devolved upon
plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 4. Thus, without commenting upon as to the
extent of share of parties, it is clear that none of defendants has denied that
plaintiff has share in the suit property that was in possession of Late. Mr.
Amar Nath Dhingra, therefore, none of the defendants has any right, title or
interest to sell the property or create any 3rd party interest without
adjudication of extent of share in the suit property. So, Property is required to
be protected from creation of any 3rd party interest during the pendency of
the suit. Accordingly, prima-facie case lies in favour of the plaintiff. Balance
of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff. Prayer is made in respect of
the immovable property so irreparable injury shall be caused to him if
injunction is not granted. Hence, the application in hand is allowed.
Defendants are hereby restrained from creating any 3rd party interest in
respect of the suit property i.e. back portion of Ground Floor, measuring
214.50 Sq. Yds of H. No. D-1/25, Model Town-II, Delhi-110009 during the
pendency of the suit. Application stands disposed off.
Now, put up for further proceedings for 21.09.2026 for which
all the parties are directed to appear in person.
(Aanchal)
District Judge-03, Rohini Courts
North District, Delhi
25.05.2026(amt)
-- 2 of 2 --