DRAFT A SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

AGAINST THE PERSONS WHO ARE NOT READY TO STOP

ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION IN YOUR ANCESTRAL

PROPERTY

SUBMITTED BY:

Taruna Shandilya

ROLL NO:180, SECTION B

SEMESTER VIII

SUBMITTED TO:

Mr.Parvesh Kumar Rajput

(FACULTY,DRAFTING PLEADING AND CONVEYANCING)

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

I, Taruna Shandilya , hereby declare that, this project report entitled, ‘Draft a suit for permanent
injunction against the persons who are not ready to stop illegal construction in ypur ancestral
property’ submitted to Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur is record of an original work
done by me under the guidance of Mr. Parvesh Kumar Rajput , Assistant Professor, H.N.L.U.,
Raipur and that no part of this work has been plagiarized without citations.

Taruna Shandilya

Section B

Roll no. 180

Batch 2015

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to foremost thank my DPC teacher, Mr. Parvesh Kumar Rajput for his support,
direction and advice in helping me conduct my research successfully and in answering all my
queries so as to make this research even more enriching.

I would also like to thank the library staff for providing ample sources for conducting this
research and making the timings lenient so that the books could be used for longer periods.

Last but not the least, I wish to thank my seniors and peers for taking time out for me despite
their tight schedule and attending to all my queries to the best of their abilities.

Taruna Shandilya

Section B

Roll no. 180

Batch 2015

3
 CONTENTS

 DECLARATION 2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3
 TABLE OF CONTENT 4
 INTRODUCTION 5
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 6
 A. OBJECTIVES 6
 B. SOURCES OF DATA 6
 C. NATURE OF STUDY 6
 CHAPTER- I 7
 CHAPTER –II 9
 CHAPTER- III 10
 PRAYER 12
 VERIFICATION 12
 CONCLUSION 13
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 14

4
 CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION

The Hindu Law defines a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) as a family which consists of male
lineage decedents from a common ancestor and also includes their wives and unmarried
daughters. HUF is also a separate legal entity under the Income and Wealth Tax Act and is
liable to pay tax. It is common knowledge that the affair of the HUF is managed by the Karta.
Hindu Law is comprised of two schools of law, Dayabhaga and Mitakshraschool. Dayabhaga
is applied in West Bengal and Assam and Mitakshra are applied in rest of India.

Partition means ending the status of Joint Hindu Family. Under Hindu Law when the Joint
Family status comes to an end there is division of property among members and joint
ownership of property comes to an end. Partition of the HUF property can be of two types
under the Hindu Law i.e. total and partial. In total partition, all the member of the HUF ceases
to be members of the HUF and the whole property ceases to be the HUF property. In partial
partnership, the willing members of the HUF opt out of the partnership and the rest of the
people continue to be members of HUF. Partial partition can be property specific too where
the property is divided between members and the rest of the property continues to HUF
property1.

To start partition proceedings all that is necessary is a clear indication by a member of the
HUF to separate himself from the family. Such declaration should be known to the members
of the HUF who would be affected by the decision. Partition of the property will only take
place when all the members of the HUF agree to the terms of the partition2.
Partition of HUF can be done through family settlement or through partition deed. Stamp duty
is not required for family settlement and thus is not required to be registered, whereas
partition deed attracts stamp duty and must be registered. Due to huge expenses that come
along with partition, family settlement is preferred. Things to keep in mind while perusing
with the option of family settlement is that the partition should be voluntary and should be
without any force, threat, coercion or fraud. It should be fair and equitable settlement and
though it is unstamped and unregistered it is binding on every member.
1
The Hindu Succession act 1956, Eastern Law House
2
RK Aggarwal, Hindu law, Central Law Agency, (25th Edition) 2016

5
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A.OBJECTIVES

a. To study the law relating to drafting of plaint regarding partition of joint

b. To draft a plaint regarding partition of joint Hindu Family property.

B.SOURCES OF DATA

Data used has been taken from primary as well as secondary sources of
information.

C.NATURE OF STUDY

This project is a study which is mainly descriptive in nature.

6
 CHAPTER II- PARTITION OF UNDIVIDED HINDU PROPERTY

Partition, is an act by which a coparcener severs his relations with joint family and loses his
status of coparcener and becomes an independent individual from the links of joint family. An
important consequence of such partition is that the share of coparcener or coparceners seeking
partition which is till partition uncertain, fluctuating and unpredictable, becomes specific and
definite, as a result of partition, and thus allotted to the respective members3.

HOW PARTITION IS AFFECTED?

Severance of Joint Status or interest-expression of intention- one member of joint family can
express his intention to partition, even though no actual partition take place4.

 by Notice
 by Will
 Conversion to another Religion.
 Marriage under special marriage act.
 by agreement
 by arbitration
 by father
 by suit

FACTS IN THE PRESENT ISSUE:

Late Chunee Lal has five sons Ram Lal (“Plaintiff”) resident of 29, Civil Lines, Dehradun,
Dev Lal (“Defendant No.1”), Manik Lal (“Defendant No. 2”), Sohan Lal (“Defendant No.
3”), and Late Sham Lal who’s represented in the present suit through Madhav Lal
(“Defendant No.4”) all residents of 29, Civil Lines, Dehradun . After the death of Chunee
Lal, he left a villa situated at 29, Civil Lines, Dehradun as his property, the residence of the
parties, which is now the joint property of his four sons. His 4 th son Sham Lal sold his share in
the property to Rati Ram, son of Shri Sati Ram, resident of 171, Shakti Vihar, Dehradun. Rati
3
Principles of Hindu Law, Universal law publishing co. Pvt.ltd.
4
Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Family Law II Lectures, Lexis Nexis, (3rd Edition) 20

7
Ram is trying to get into the joint property badly and his exhausting all his means to achieve
the same. To avoid any severe consequences the Plaintiff has preferred partition of his share
in the property. Hence the plaintiff has preferred to institute a suit for partition in the court of
Dehradun. The plaint for the following is drafted under Order VII, Rule 1 of Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) to institute a suit for partition.

LAW UNDER WHICH THE PLAINT IS FILED:

ORDER VII, RULE 1 of CPC states the following

1. Particulars to be contained in plaint.- The plaint shall contain the following particulars:

(a) the name of the court in which the Suit is brought;

(b) the name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff;

(c) the name, description and place of residence of the defendant, so far as they can be
ascertained;

(d) where the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind, a statement to
that affect;

(e) the facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose;

(f) the facts showing that the court has jurisdiction;

(g) the relief which the plaintiff claims;

(h) where the plaintiff has allowed a set off or relinquished a portion of his claim the amount
so allowed or relinquished; and

(i) a statement of the value of the subject matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction and
of court fees, so far as the case admits.

8
 CHAPTER III- SUIT FOR PARTITION OF UNDIVIDED
HINDU PROPERTY

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION

AT DEHRADUN (UTTARAKHAND)

O.S. No. /2018

1. MR.RAM LAL, S/O MR. CHUNEE LAL R/o 29, CIVIL LINES, DEHRADUN

… PLAINTIFF

VERUS

2. MR. DEV LAL, S/O LATE MR. CHUNEE LAL, R/o 29, CIVIL LINES,
DEHRADUN

… DEFENDANT NO. 1

3. MR. MANIK LAL, S/O LATE MR. CHUNEE LAL, R/o 29, CIVIL LINES, DEHRADUN

… DEFENDANT NO. 2

4. MR. SOHAN LAL, S/O LATE MR. CHUNEE LAL, R/o 29, CIVIL LINES, DEHRADUN

… DEFENDANT NO. 3

5. MR. MADHAV LAL, S/O LATE MR. SHAM LAL, R/o 29, CIVIL LINES, DEHRADUN

… DEFENDANT NO. 4

6. MR. RATI RAM, S/O, MR. SATI RAM, R/o 171, SHAKTI VIHAR, DEHRADUN

… PROFORMA DEFENDANT

9
 CHAPTER IV- PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER VII, RULE 1
OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

SUIT VALUED AT: Rs. 1,00,40,000/-

Sir,

The above named plaintiff

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH/STATES AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the plaintiff and the defendant No.1 to 4 are a member of a joint Hindu family.
Defendant No.1 to 3 and plaintiff are real brothers whereas defendant No.4 is the son
of late Sham Lal who is also a real brother of plaintiff and defendant No. 1 to 3.
Unfortunately he has died on 18th August, 2017 leaving behind his only son (defendant
No.4).

2. That the father of the plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 4 late Sri Chunee Lal is the
Karta of joint Hindu family purchased the property in suit, from Sri Nand Lal vide sale
deed dated 16th April, 1975 which is duly registered in the office of sub registrar
Dehradun in bahi No. 18 volume 5 page No. 537 registered on 5 th May, 1975. Late
Chunee Lal died on 24th July, 2015 intestate.

3. That the plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 4 are in joint possession of the property in
suit. Plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 4 have equal undivided share in the whole of the
property. In other words each have 1/5th share of in the whole of the property dispute.

4. That the defendant No. 4 has sold his undivided 1/5th share of the suit property to
Sri Rati Ram, who is made party in the suit as a Performa defendant and no relief
claimed against him.

5. That the Performa defendant No.5 is trying to get possession in the joint property by
hook and crook and threatening for dire consequences.

10
6. For the above reasons it would be to the plaintiff’s benefit to have his share
separated by partition.

7. That the plaintiff claims partition of the said property and separate possession of his
1/5th share.

8. That the cause of action for the said suit, being when the proforma defendant
arrived at the plaintiff’s residence to claim possession on his share of property,
occurred on 24th February, 2018.

9. That the suit property is situated in Dehradun and all the parties permanently
residing in Dehradun, within the jurisdiction of this honorable court. Hence this court
has jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate this suit.

10. For the purpose of court fees and jurisdiction, suit valued at rupees Rs. 1,00,40,000
/- (One crore and forty thousand only) which is a market value of plaintiff’s 1/5th
share of the disputed property and appropriate court fees thereupon being paid.

PRAYER:

11
 The Petitioners therefore respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
pass the Judgement and Decree;

i)Granting decree of partition by ordering the defendants to pay 1/5th share of the
plaintiff and thereby alienate him from the joint property which being situated at 29,
Civil Lines, Dehradun;
ii)Granting such further or other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
necessary in the circumstances of the case.
Dated at Dehradun on this the 6th day of March, 2018.

PLAINTIFF’S SIGNATURE

VERIFICATION

I, MR. RAM LAL, the Plaintiff above named do hereby declare that whatever stated above in
paragraphs 1 to 10 is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and information and
I have verified and signed on my name.

Dated at Dehradun on this the 6th day of March, 2018.

PLAINTIFF

CONCLUSION

12
The partition is generally irrevocable in nature. However, for the purposes of equity, it is

advisable to reopen the partition already affected. Even the laws of Manu advise the additional

distribution of property which was added subsequent to the partition. The rationale behind is to

prevent gross injustice to the member of the family. The research paper tries to cover almost every

instance where a partition could be reopened. The paper is informative in nature and does not

convey any personal self-generated thoughts and opinion. All the websites and books used for

reference are cited for acknowledging the authenticity5.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acts Referred-
5
CJ Fuller, “Hinduism and Scriptual Authority in Modern Indian Law”, 1988.

13
 • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Books Referred-

• Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law, 6thedn., Allahabad Law Agency.

• Principles of Hindu Law for BSL & LL.B by Noshirvan H. Jhabvala - C. Jamnadas&
Co., 2017 Edition.

• RK Aggarwal, Hindu law, Central Law Agency, (25th Edition) 2016

• Dr. Ashok K. Jain, Family law Lectures, Ascent Publications.

• Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Family Law II Lectures, Lexis Nexis, (3rd Edition) 2016.

14