The Delhi High Court recently handed down a significant decision in a partition suit involving issues raised by the petitioners and respondents. The case involves the demand for a separate water connection on the property, impacting the peaceful enjoyment and rights of the parties involved. Stay tuned to learn more about the court’s ruling on this crucial matter.
Facts
- Petitioner filed a suit for partition, rendition of account, mandatory and permanent injunction.
- Petitioner’s father-in-law owned the suit property.
- Respondents claimed ownership based on multiple wills executed by deceased family members.
- Petitioners were accused of being unauthorized occupants.
- Petitioners faced obstruction in the supply of water in the suit property.
- Petitioner no. 1 got 50% share after the death of the original owners.
- Petitioners raised issues of nuisance created by respondents in the suit property.
Arguments
- Petitioners have made a prima facie case for separate water connection based on the recommendation of the Local Commissioner.
- Petitioners claim continuous nuisance and hindrance by the respondents, violating their human rights to pressure them to sell the property at low prices.
- Counsel for respondents argues that the petitioners are attempting to harass them and have installed a personal water tank for their exclusive use.
- Petitioners’ plea for separate water connection is deemed beyond the scope of the original pleadings by the Trial Court.
- Allowing separate water connection is essential for petitioners’ basic amenity, while respondents argue against it due to the building’s age and safety concerns.
Analysis
- Separate water connection issue is considered a separate cause of action
- It cannot be merged with the present suit according to the facts and circumstances of the case
- The suit revolves around the subject property and peaceful enjoyment of its possession until adjudication by the Trial Court.
- No further directions were deemed necessary on the learned LC report.
- The plaintiff can seek remedies for the installation of a separate water connection in an appropriate court of law.
- The petitioners had previously filed an application under Section 151 CPC for a separate water connection.
- The previous application was decided on 06.02.2021.
- A review application was filed by the petitioners and was decided on 04.09.2021.
- The Trial Court did not consider the previous orders and the report of the Local Commissioner.
- Summarily dismissing the application without considering past decisions was improper.
Decision
- The case has been remanded back to the Trial Court for reconsideration of the application by the petitioners.
- The petitioners will have an opportunity to be heard during the reconsideration process.
- The Trial Court will review previous orders regarding the water connection issue and the report of the Local Commissioner.
- A review application by the respondents was decided on 07.12.2021.
- The report of the Local Commissioner, who inspected the site, was also considered.
- The pending application has been disposed of along with the petition.
- Interim orders regarding water supply were issued by the Trial Court on 13.02.2019 and 18.03.2019.
Case Title: SMT. SNEH GUPTA & ANR. Vs. SMT. VERSHA RANI & ANR. (2024:DHC:3899)
Case Number: CM(M)-1152/2022
