Partition Suit Varun

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, AMRITSAR.
CASE NO.________________
DATE OF FILING._____________
DATE OF DECISION______________
JOGINDER KUMAR ………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SURINDER NATH & OTHERS ……….DEFENDANTS
(SUIT FOR POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION)
INDEX
SR. NO. PARTICULARS PAGES COURT FEE

1. PLAINT
2. DUPLICATE PLAINT
3. AFFIDAVIT
4. FORM OF ADDRESS
5. POWER OF ATTORNEY
6. COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS
RELIED UPON BY THE PETITIONER
7. FORM U/O 7 R 14/PROCESS FEE
……………PLAINTIFF
Through
counsel
DATE:
PLACE: AMRITSAR
AMIT MONGA
ADVOCATE
(P/1209/2005)
(M) 98761-82455
1
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION,
AMRITSAR
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR AGED ___ YEARS SON OF LATE SH.

SARDARI LAL KHANNA R/O 3, SURAJ AVENUE, NEAR HANUMAN
MANDIR, FATEHGARH CHURIAN ROAD, AMRITSAR.
………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL

2. SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
……….BOTH R/O 451, BASANT AVENUE, AMRITSAR.
3. SH. SUBHASH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O 150,
SHASTRI NAGAR, B/S ARCHIES GALLERY, AMRITSAR.
4. Sh. VIJAY KUMAR (SINCE DIED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS
(A) SMT. VEENA W/O VIJAY KUMAR
(B) MRS. MANJU D/O LATE SH. VIJAY KUMAR
(C) SH. SANJEEV KUMAR S/O LATE VIJAY KUMAR ALL
RESIDENT OF 451,BASANT AVENUE,AMRITSAR.
………..DEFENDANTS
5. SH. ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O 450,
BASANT AVENUE, NEAR AJANTA PUBLIC SCHOOL, AMRITSAR.
…….PERFORMA DEFENDANT
2
SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION BY METES
AND BOUNDS BY WAY OF PARTITION TO THE
EXTENT OF 2/6TH SHARE OF THE PLAINTIFF IN
PROPERTY BEARING PRIVATE NO. 451,
MEASURING 302 SQ. YARDS, KHASRA NO. 705
MIN. (AS PER SALE DEED), KHASRA NO.
1264/701-702-704-705 ALL MIN. AS PER
JAMABANDI FOR THE YEAR 2010-11
SITUATED AT TUNG BALA URBAN, ABADI
BASANT AVENUE, AMRITSAR.
AND
ALSO SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANTS, THEIR
ASSOCIATES, AGENTS, PRIVIES, ATTORNEYS,
REPRESENTATIVES ETC. FROM SELLING,
ALIENATING, MORTGAGING, LEASING OUT,
LETTING OUT AND DEALING WITH THE ABOVE
SAID PROPERTY IN ANY MANNER
WHATSOEVER TRANSFERRING THE SUIT
PROPERTY OR ANY SPECIFIC PORTION
THEREOF TO ANY BODY ELSE WITHOUT
EFFECTING ITS PARTITION BY METES AND
BOUNDS
AND
ALSO RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANTS FROM

RAISING ANY SORT OF CONSTRUCTION, AND
RENOVATION ETC. OVER THE ABOVE SAID
3
PROPERTY ILLEGALLY AND UNLAWFULLY IN
ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER.
Sir,
The plaintiff is respectfully submits as under:-
1. That the property bearing private no. 451, total measuring 302
sq. yds., khasra no. 705 Min. (as per sale deed), khasra no.
1264/701-702-704-705 all Min. as per jamabandi for the year
20_______ situated at Tung Bala Urban, Abadi Basant Avenue,
Amritsar was purchased by Smt. Janakwati w/o sh. Late Sardari
Lal vide sale deed 21.11.85 and after purchasing the above said
property Smt. Janak Wati also raised the construction over the
said property during her life time. (Copy of the sale deed dt.
21.11.1985 is attached herewith as Annexure A-1 and site plan
of the property is attached as Annexure A-2)
2. That the above said property was exclusively owned and
possessed by Smt. Janakwati on the basis of above referred sale
deed.
3. That smt. Janakwati had died intestate on __________ (copy of
death certificate is attached herewith as Annexure A-3) and the
husband of Smt. Janak Wati was predeceased and thus leaving
behind the following legal heirs:-
4
A. SH. JOGINDER KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
B. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
C. SH. SUBHASH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
D. SH. VIJAY KUMAR (SINCE DIED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS
(B) MS. MANJU D/O LATE SH. VIJAY KUMAR
(C) SH. SANJEEV KUMAR S/O LATE VIJAY KUMAR
E. SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
F. SH. ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
4. That after the death of Smt. Janak wati the above said property
was inherited by all the above said legal heirs to the extent of
1/6th share each. In the month of March`2017, the defendant no.
5 Sh. Ashok kumar has transferred his 1/6 th share to the plaintiff
vide transfer deed dated 17.03.2017 duly registered in the office
of Sub Registrar, Amritsar bearing document no. 15252, Bahi no.
1, Jild no. 7026, page no. 84-85. As such, the plaintiff is entitled
for 2/6th share out of the total property in question. Copy of
transfer deed is attached as Annexure A-4)
5. That due to the jointness of the said property there remains
dispute between the plaintiff and defendants and as such, the
plaintiff do not want to keep the said property joint with the
defendants and as such few days back the plaintiff claimed his
share in the property referred to above from defendants and
asked them to partition the above said property as he does not
5
want to keep the property joint with the defendants but instead
of acceding to request of the plaintiff rather defendant falsely
claimed that they are the exclusive owners of the said property
while the fact remains that the plaintiff is also co owner in
possession of the above said property to the extent of 2/6 th share
and therefore, on account of dispute the plaintiff does not want to
keep the property joint and want to partition the same by metes
and bounds.
6. That the plaintiff requested the defendants on various occasion to
partition the property in question by metes and bounds but they
did not pay any heed to his genuine and legitimate requests and
on the others hands started threatening that they will alienate
the suit property and or change the nature of the suit property by
making illegal construction, but the said property being jointly
owned by the plaintiff and defendants and in joint possession
cannot be sold to any other person nor any construction can be
made therein without the consent of the plaintiff but the
defendants did not pay any heed to the genuine requests of the
plaintiff , therefore, necessity to file the present suit has arisen.
7. That keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances it
become quite evident is a good prima facie case in favour of the
plaintiff and balance of convenience also lies in his favour and in
6
case this defendants succeeds in their nefarious activities in that
eventuality the plaintiff shall suffer huge irreparable loss and
injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money.
8. That the cause of action for filing the present suit has accrued in
favour of the plaintiff against the defendant few days back when
the defendants gave threats to the plaintiff to alienate the
property and also refused to partition the same by metes and
bounds and the cause of action finally accrued yesterday when
the defendants flatly refused to listen the genuine requests to
the plaintiff and on the other and they are giving continuing
threats to the plaintiff.
9. That no other similar suit between the same parties on the
same subject matter and on the same cause of action with regard
to the same relief either pending or has been decided by any
competent court of law.
10. That suit property is situated at Amritsar and the cause of action
has also arisen at Amritsar, therefore, this Hon`ble court is
having territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit.
11. That the value of the suit for the purpose of court fee and
jurisdiction is Rs. 500/- for the relief of separate possession by
way of partition and is Rs. 1000/- for both the relief of permanent
injunction, therefore requisite court is affixed on the plaint.
7
Prayer:-
under the circumstances and facts stated above, it is ,
therefore, respectfully prayed that a decree for separate
possession by metes and bounds by way of partition of property
bearing private no. 451, measuring 302 sq. yards, khasra no.
705 min. (as per sale deed), khasra no. 1264/701-702-704-705
all min. as per the jamabandi for the year _______ situated at
Tung Bala Urban, Abadi Basant Avenue, Amritsar and also suit for
permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their associates,
agents, privies, attorneys, representatives etc. from selling,
alienating, mortgaging, leasing out, letting out and dealing with
the above said property in any manner whatsoever till its
partition by metes and bounds and also restraining the
defendants from raising any sort of construction, and renovation
etc. over the above said property illegally and unlawfully in any
manner whatsoever, may kindly be passed in favour of plaintiff
and against the defendant alongwith costs of litigation in the
interst of justice, equity and fair play.
Any other relief to which the plaintiff is found entitled to
under law and equity may also be granted to him.
Date: ….………plaintiff
8
Place: Amritsar Joginder Kumar
Through counsel
AMIT MONGA, ADVOCATE
AMRITSAR
Verfication:-
Verified that the contents of para no.1 to 7 of plaint are true to the best
of my knowledge and belief and para no 8 to 11 are true as per
information received and believed to be correct. Last para is prayer
clause.
Verified at Amritsar on dated ___________ .
(Plaintiff)
9
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, AMRITSAR
Duplicate plaint
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR AGED ___ YEARS SON OF LATE SH.

MANDIR, FATEHGARH CHURIAN ROAD, AMRITSAR.
….………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL

2. SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
……….BOTH R/O 451, BASANT AVENUE, AMRITSAR.
3. SH. SUBHASH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O 150,
SHASTRI NAGAR, B/S ARCHIES GALLERY, AMRITSAR.
4. Sh. VIJAY KUMAR (SINCE DIED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS
(B) MRS. MANJU D/O LATE SH. VIJAY KUMAR
(C) SH. SANJEEV KUMAR S/O LATE VIJAY KUMAR ALL
RESIDENT OF 451,BASANT AVENUE,AMRITSAR.
………..DEFENDANT
S
5. SH. ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O 450,
BASANT AVENUE, NEAR AJANTA PUBLIC SCHOOL, AMRITSAR.
10
…….PERFORMA
DEFENDANT
SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION BY METES

AND BOUNDS BY WAY OF PARTITION TO THE
EXTENT OF 2/6TH SHARE OF THE PLAINTIFF IN
PROPERTY BEARING PRIVATE NO. 451,
MEASURING 302 SQ. YARDS, KHASRA NO. 705
MIN. (AS PER SALE DEED), KHASRA NO.
1264/701-702-704-705 ALL MIN. AS PER
JAMABANDI FOR THE YEAR ______ SITUATED
AT TUNG BALA URBAN, ABADI BASANT
AVENUE, AMRITSAR.
AND
ALSO SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANTS, THEIR
ASSOCIATES, AGENTS, PRIVIES, ATTORNEYS,
REPRESENTATIVES ETC. FROM SELLING,
ALIENATING, MORTGAGING, LEASING OUT,
LETTING OUT AND DEALING WITH THE ABOVE
SAID PROPERTY IN ANY MANNER
WHATSOEVER TRANSFERRING THE SUIT
PROPERTY OR ANY SPECIFIC PORTION
THEREOF TO ANY BODY ELSE WITHOUT
EFFECTING ITS PARTITION BY METES AND
BOUNDS
AND
11
ALSO RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANTS FROM
RAISING ANY SORT OF CONSTRUCTION, AND
RENOVATION ETC. OVER THE ABOVE SAID
PROPERTY ILLEGALLY AND UNLAWFULLY IN
ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER.
Sir,
The plaintiff is respectfully submits as under:-
deed.
3. That Smt. Janakwati had died intestate on __________ (copy of
12

B. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
C. SH. SUBHASH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
E. SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
13
and bounds.
14
15
Prayer:-
under the circumstances and facts stated above, it is ,
therefore, respectfully prayed that a decree for separate
possession by metes and bounds by way of partition of property
bearing private no. 451, measuring 302 sq. yards, khasra no.
705 min. (as per sale deed), khasra no. 1264/701-702-704-705
all min. as per the jamabandi for the year _______ situated at
Tung Bala Urban, Abadi Basant Avenue, Amritsar and also suit for
permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their associates,
agents, privies, attorneys, representatives etc. from selling,
alienating, mortgaging, leasing out, letting out and dealing with
the above said property in any manner whatsoever till its
partition by metes and bounds and also restraining the
defendants from raising any sort of construction, and renovation
etc. over the above said property illegally and unlawfully in any
manner whatsoever, may kindly be passed in favour of plaintiff
and against the defendant alongwith costs of litigation in the
interst of justice, equity and fair play.

16
Any other relief to which the plaintiff is found entitled to
under law and equity may also be granted to him.
Date: ….………plaintiff
Place: Amritsar Joginder Kumar
Through counsel
AMRITSAR
Verfication:-
Verified that the contents of para no.1 to 7 of plaint are true to the best
of my knowledge and belief and para no 8 to 11 are true as per
information received and believed to be correct. Last para is prayer
clause.
Verified at Amritsar on dated ___________ .
(Plaintiff)
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION,

AMRITSAR
17
AFFIDAVIT
JOGINDER KUMAR ….………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SURINDER NATH & others …….PERFORMA DEFENDANT
(SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION & PERMANENT

INJUNCTION)
AFFIDAVIT
I, JOGINDER KUMAR AGED ___ YEARS SON OF LATE SH.
MANDIR, FATEHGARH CHURIAN ROAD, AMRITSAR DO HEREBY
SOLEMNLY DECLARE AND AFFIRM AS UNDER:-
18
deed.
3. That Smt. Janakwati had died intestate on __________ (copy of

B. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
C. SH. SUBHASH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
E. SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL R/O
19
and bounds.
20
21
Deponen
t
Verification:
Verified that the contents of the above said affidavit are true and
correct to my knowledge and belief.
Verified at Amritsar on ____________.
Deponent
22
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, SENIOR
DIVISION, AMRITSAR
VERSUS
SURINDER NATH & OTHERS ………..DEFENDANTS
(SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION)
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39, RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH 151 OF

CPC.
Sir,
It is humbly submitted as under:-
1. That the above named case is entrusted to this Hon’ble court.
2. That the plaintiff has prima facie case to establish simply on the basis
of facts mentioned in the pliant which may read as part and parcel of
this application.
3. That the balance of convenience is also lies in favour of the
plaintiff/applicant.
23
4. That if the interim injunction is not granted then it will cause
irreparable loss and injury to the plaintiff by the unlawful acts of the
defendant and it will further injured constitutional and fundamental
rights of the plaintiff.
it is, therefore, prayed that ad-interim injunction restraining the

defendants the defendants, their associates, agents, privies, attorneys,
representatives etc. from selling, alienating, mortgaging, leasing out,
letting out and dealing with the above said property in any manner
whatsoever transferring the suit property or any specific portion
thereof to anybody else without effecting its partition by metes and
bounds and also restraining the defendants from raising any sort of
construction, and renovation etc. over the above said property illegally
and unlawfully in any manner whatsoever mentioned above may kindly
be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants with
costs.
Any other relief to which the plaintiff is found entitled may also
granted to it.
…….……. Plaintiff
DATE:
PLACE: AMRITSAR
JOGINDER KUMAR
Through counsel

AMRITSAR.
24
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, SENIOR
DIVISION, AMRITSAR
VERSUS
25
SURINDER NATH & OTHERS ………..DEFENDANTS
(SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION)
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39, RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH 151 OF

CPC.
AFFIDAVIT
I, JOGINDER KUMAR AGED ___ YEARS SON OF LATE SH. SARDARI LAL
KHANNA R/O 3, SURAJ AVENUE, NEAR HANUMAN MANDIR, FATEHGARH
CHURIAN ROAD, AMRITSAR DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY DECLARE AND AFFIRM
AS UNDER:-
1. That the above named case is entrusted to this Hon’ble court.
2. That the plaintiff has prima facie case to establish simply on the basis
of facts mentioned in the pliant which may read as part and parcel of
this application.
3. That the balance of convenience is also lies in favour of the
plaintiff/applicant.
4. That if the interim injunction is not granted then it will cause
irreparable loss and injury to the plaintiff by the unlawful acts of the
defendant and it will further injured constitutional and fundamental
rights of the plaintiff.
Deponent
Verification:
26
Verified that the contents of the above said affidavit are true and
correct to my knowledge and belief.
Verified at Amritsar on ____________.
Deponent
27

Partition Suit Varun

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Partition Suit Varun

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, AMRITSAR.

JOGINDER KUMAR ………PLAINTIFF

SURINDER NATH & OTHERS ……….DEFENDANTS

(SUIT FOR POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION)

SR. NO. PARTICULARS PAGES COURT FEE

SH. JOGINDER KUMAR AGED ___ YEARS SON OF LATE SH.

1. SH. SURINDER NATH S/O LATE SH. SARDARI LAL

ALSO SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

ALSO RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANTS FROM

The plaintiff is respectfully submits as under:-

1264/701-702-704-705 all Min. as per jamabandi for the year

20_______ situated at Tung Bala Urban, Abadi Basant Avenue,

Amritsar was purchased by Smt. Janakwati w/o sh. Late Sardari

21.11.1985 is attached herewith as Annexure A-1 and site plan

of the property is attached as Annexure A-2)

2. That the above said property was exclusively owned and

possessed by Smt. Janakwati on the basis of above referred sale

3. That smt. Janakwati had died intestate on __________ (copy of

death certificate is attached herewith as Annexure A-3) and the

husband of Smt. Janak Wati was predeceased and thus leaving

behind the following legal heirs:-

1/6th share each. In the month of March`2017, the defendant no.

vide transfer deed dated 17.03.2017 duly registered in the office

of Sub Registrar, Amritsar bearing document no. 15252, Bahi no.

for 2/6th share out of the total property in question. Copy of

transfer deed is attached as Annexure A-4)

5. That due to the jointness of the said property there remains

dispute between the plaintiff and defendants and as such, the

share in the property referred to above from defendants and

asked them to partition the above said property as he does not

of acceding to request of the plaintiff rather defendant falsely

while the fact remains that the plaintiff is also co owner in

possession of the above said property to the extent of 2/6 th share

and therefore, on account of dispute the plaintiff does not want to

6. That the plaintiff requested the defendants on various occasion to

partition the property in question by metes and bounds but they

on the others hands started threatening that they will alienate

making illegal construction, but the said property being jointly

owned by the plaintiff and defendants and in joint possession

cannot be sold to any other person nor any construction can be

made therein without the consent of the plaintiff but the

plaintiff , therefore, necessity to file the present suit has arisen.

7. That keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances it

become quite evident is a good prima facie case in favour of the

plaintiff and balance of convenience also lies in his favour and in

eventuality the plaintiff shall suffer huge irreparable loss and

injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money.

the defendants gave threats to the plaintiff to alienate the

property and also refused to partition the same by metes and

bounds and the cause of action finally accrued yesterday when

the defendants flatly refused to listen the genuine requests to

threats to the plaintiff.

9. That no other similar suit between the same parties on the

to the same relief either pending or has been decided by any

competent court of law.

has also arisen at Amritsar, therefore, this Hon`ble court is

having territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit.

jurisdiction is Rs. 500/- for the relief of separate possession by

injunction, therefore requisite court is affixed on the plaint.

under the circumstances and facts stated above, it is ,

therefore, respectfully prayed that a decree for separate

possession by metes and bounds by way of partition of property