Kailash Chand Methi Son Of Shri Ramdayal Methi v. Rajender Kumar, Son Of Rameshwar Dayal

Judgment

2. 2/1. Rajender Kumar, Son Of Rameshwar Dayal Rameshwar Dayal Son Of Not Known, (Deceased) L.r. In Possession Of Property Yashwant Son Of Rameshwar Dayal, Resident Of Basant Vihar, Plot No. 27, Scheme No. 3, Alwar, District Alwar (Deceased Through L.rs. In Possession Of Property 2/1/1. Geeta Devi, Wife Of Yashwant 2/1/2. Shubham, Son Of Yashwant 2/1/3. Shaifali Daughter Of Late Yashwant, 2/2. 2/3. 2/4. Resident Of 1414, Vijay Nagar, Behind Pragati Hospital, Alwar (Rajasthan) Amar Son Of Late Rameshwar Dayal, Resident Of 27 Basant Vihar, Scheme No. 3, Alwar (Rajasthan)

Shrimati Sharbati Devi Wife Of Late Rameshwar Dayal, Resident Of Khairthal (Deceased) Sushila Wife Of Satish Chand, Daughter Of Late Rameshwar Dayal, Resident Of Plot No. 22, Scheme No. 1, Alwar (Rajasthan) 2/5. Usha Devi Daughter Of Late Shri Rameshwardayal, Resident Of Delhi.

7. 7/1. 7/2. 7/3. Kedarnath, Son Of Shri Rameshwardayal Narender Kumar Son Of Shri Rameshwar Dayal, Resident Of 27, Basant Vihar Scheme N. 3, Alwar (Rajasthan). Satish Chand, Son Of Ramavtar Smt. Sushila Devi, Wife Of Satish Chand Shrimati Rama Devi Wife Of Ramavtar, (Deceased) Through L.rs. Satish Chand Son Of Ramavtar, Resident Of Plot No. 7, Scheme No. 2, Alwar (Rajasthan). Sarla Gupta Daughter Of Ramavtar, Wife Of Dr. R.c. Gupta, Resident Of 49/7 Bungalow Road, Kamla Nagar, New Delhi. Usha Khandelwal Daughter Of Ramavtar, Wife Of Giriraj Prasad, Resident Of M/s Khandelwal Enterprises, Pucca Katra, Barelli (U.p.) [2025:RJ-JP:3785] (2 of 5) [CW-167/2025] 7/4. 7/5.

9. 9/1. 9/2.

11. Sarita Khandelwal Daughter Of Ramavtar, Wife Of Ashok Khandelwal, Resident Of Assam Tea Store, Subzi Mandi, Gurgaon (Haryana) Beena Khandelwal Daughter Of Ramavtar, Wife Of Shyam Sunder Khandelwal, Resident Of Agarwal Sweet, Ganesh Nagar Paadav Nagar, Flat No. B-4, Opposite Mother Dairy, Shakkarpur, New Delhi. Ajay Kumar Son Of Satish Chand, Resident Of Plot No. 22, Scheme No. 1, Alwar, District Alwar. Ramdayal Son Of Late Shri Ramswaroop, (Deceased) Through L.rs Banarsi Devi Wife Of Ramdayal, Resident Of Plot No. 23- A Vijay Mandir Road, Scheme No. 2, Alwar (Rajasthan) (Deceased) Saroj Daughter Of Ramdayal, Wife Of Umesh, Resident Of M/s New Khandelwal Emporium, Opposite Town Hall, Muradabad. Raghuveer Sharan, Son Of Ramdayal Umashankar Son Of Ramdayal, (Deceased) Through Lrs 11/1. Kanta Methi, Wife Of Late Shri Uma Shankar 11/2. Atul Methi Son Of Late Shri Uma Shankar, (Deceased) Through Lrs 11/2/1 Sunita Methi, Wife Of Late Shri Atul Methi 11/2/2 Aniket Methi, Son Of Late Shri Atul Methi 11/2/3 Shruti Methi Daughter Of Late Shri Atul Methi, Resident Of 23-A, Lajpat Nagar, Scheme No. 2, Vijay Mandir Road, Alwar, District Alwar (Rajasthan) 11/3. Amrish Methi Son Of Late Shri Umashankar Methi, Resident Of C-333, Model Town, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 11/4. Amit Methi, Son Of Late Shri Umashankar Methi 11/5. Aatish Meth Son Of Late Shri Uma Shankar Methi, Resident Of 23-A, Lajpat Nagar, Scheme No. 2, Vijay Mandir Road, Alwar, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

15. Ashok Kumar Son Of Ramdayal, Resident Of Plot No. 23- A, Scheme No. 2 Alwar (Rajasthan) Pradeep Kumar Methi Son Of Shri Raghuveer Sharan, Resident Of Plot No. 23-A, Scheme No. 2, Alwar (Rajasthan). Kishanlal Mahawar Son Of Harikishan, Resident Of M/s Parish General Store, Near Khandelwal Dharamshala, Bus Stand Road, Alwar (Rajasthan) Kusumlata Sharma Wife Of Rajender Prasad Sharma, Resident Of Choola, Tehsil Bansoor, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

16. Shrimati Krishna Devi Wife Of Late Shri Kailash Chand [2025:RJ-JP:3785] (3 of 5) [CW-167/2025]

19. Methi, Resident Of Plot No. 23-A, Scheme No. 2 Alwar. Amita Khandelwal Daughter Of Late Kailash Chand Methi, Resident Of Plot No. 23-A, Scheme No. 2 Alwar. Nisha Gupta Daughter Of Late Shri Kailash Chand Methi, Resident Of Plot No. 23-A, Scheme No. 2 Alwar. Nidhi Khandelwal Daughter Of Kailash Chand Methi, Resident Of Plot No. 23-A, Scheme No. 2 Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Mathur Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Aditya Kiran Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.P. Goyal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Ms. Jyoti Swami HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 27/01/2025

1. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-plaintiff at length so also the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.10, who has appeared as Caveator.

2. Since the writ petition is being heard and decided at admission stage, notices are not required to be issued to remaining respondents.

3. The order impugned is of date 10.12.2024, passed in Civil Suit No. 34/15/2004 by the Court of Additional District Judge No.3, Alwar, allowing the application of respondent No.10 to de- exhibit the document dated 30.05.1992, in the present Civil Suit for Partition.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner vehemently argued that the document in question dated 30.05.1992 is a family settlement and is not required to be registered essentially; [2025:RJ-JP:3785] (4 of 5) [CW-167/2025] if any deficiency of stamp duty is there, for that purpose, the document can be impounded for levying of the balance stamp duty along with penalty for which petitioner-plaintiff is ready. The further submission of learned Senior Counsel is that once the document has been exhibited and admitted in evidence, same could not have been de-exhibited and on that point, in the earlier writ petition being SBCWP No.4112/2024, vide order dated

19.11.2024, the issue was remanded to the trial Court for re- consideration but the trial Court has affirmed the objection of respondent and allowed to de-exhibit the document vide impugned order. Hence, the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional error as well as perversity.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.10 submits that the trial Court has acted well within its jurisdiction and the order impugned does not call for any interference. In addition, it has been pointed out that in the meanwhile, the trial of the present Civil Suit has concluded and the final arguments have also been heard and the suit has been posted for pronouncement of judgment.

6. Be that as it may, this Court is of the considered opinion that the objection of admissibility/ inadmissibility of the document in question, more particularly, the issue of need of registration, the issue revolves around to examine the true nature of document as to whether, if it falls within the purview of family settlement or a deed of partition. This Court in the given facts and circumstances of the case, while exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of [2025:RJ-JP:3785] (5 of 5) [CW-167/2025] the Constitution of India, is not inclined to enter into such arena and leaves it open to the petitioner-plaintiff to raise the issue before the Appellate Court, in case, his suit is decided against him on account of non-consideration of the document in question. Otherwise also, order impuged is interlocutory in nature and such liberty is available to the petitioner-plaintiff to assail the interlocutory order at the time of challenging the final judgment and decree in view of Section 105(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

7. In view of above, without interfering with the impugned order, instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner- plaintiff to raise the issue in question at the appellate stage, if occasion so arises.

8. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, stand disposed of. DEEPA RANI -375 (SUDESH BANSAL),J