PAWAN KUMAR JAIN Vs. SURENDRA NATH JAIN
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
PAWAN KUMAR JAIN
SURENDRA NATH JAIN
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) In order to understand the controversy in a matter like this, where the
litigating parties are related to each other, it would be necessary to draw
pedigree table to have clear understanding of relationship between the parties.
(2.) Jakki Mull had three sons namely Bhikkimul Jain, Johrimull and Pannalal who
were doing business together under the trading name Jakkimul and Sons. They had
various business properties across the country. In the year 1945 partition took
place as per award dated 26.2.1945 which was made rule of the Court on
8.3.1945. Bhikkimul Jain received in his share shops at New Delhi, Simla and
Ferozepur. We are concerned with the descendants of Bhikkimul Jain in the suit
and, therefore, need not discuss about the properties given to other two
brothers and Bhikkimul Jain. Bhikkimul Jain had two sons namely Moti Lal and
Shantinath Jain. After the partition, he continued his business with his said
two sons. However, in the year 1948 the three shops were closed as he faced
insolvency proceedings along with his two sons. In the year 1950, shop at Delhi
which is situated at E-27, Connaught Place (hereinafter referred to as the suit
property) was requisitioned by Estate Office, Government of India and was
released from requisition only in the year 1984-85. During this period, Sh.
Moti Lal son of Bhikkimul Jain died in the year 1963 and on 10.4.1967 Sh.
Bhikkimul died intestate. On 30.11.1968 a partnership deed was executed between
Sh. Shanti Nath Jain and two sons of his deceased brother Sh. Moti Lal Jain,
namely, Sh. Deepak Jain and Ranjan Jain. As per that partnership Sh. Shanti
Nath Jain was having share of 50% and his two nephews Deepak and Ranjan, sons of
Moti Lal Jain got 25% share each in the said business. They were at that time
19 years and 15 years old respectively. The partnership deed was submitted with
the Directorate of Estate as successors to claim back the said shop. However,
no business was transacted till 1985 as the shop in Connaught Place still
remained with the Directorate of Estate for this period. After the release of
the shop, new partnership deed was executed on 12.2.1986 as per which share of
Shanti Nath Jain was reduced to 40% and that of partner Ranjan Jain to 30% share
in the business. Instead of Deepak Jain his wife Sushila Jain was made partner
to the extent of 30%.
(3.) Sh. Shanit Nath Jain had three sons namely Pawan Jain (plaintiff No. 1), Sh.
Narendra Jain (plaintiff No. 2) and Surendra Nath Jain (defendant No. 1). The
defendant No. 1 has three sons who are impleaded in the present suit as
defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 respectively. The two other partners namely Ranjan
Jain and Sushila Jain are impleaded as the defendant Nos. 5 and 6. In fact the
suit is contested by the defendant No. 1 and, therefore, the present suit is
primarily confined to the descendants of Shanti Nath Jain. It is in respect of
the aforesaid shop at Connaught Place.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.