BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT OF PRINCIPAL
DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE, JAMMU
1. Anuradha Sharma, Age 56 Years
W/o Anil Sharma D/o Late Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma
R/o H.No.243 sector-c, Sainik Colony, Jammu.
2. Sunita Bindroo, Age 57 Years
W/o Satish Kumar Bindroo
D/o Late Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma,
R/o H.No. 37-SB/B 2nd Extension Gandhi Nagar,
Jammu.
……PLAINTIFFS
Versus
Tejashwari Sharma W/o Rajeev Sharma
R/o Village Susnal Tehsil and District Bilaspur,
Himachal at present 731/95-A, Gandhi Nagar,
Jammu.
…..DEFENDANT
IN THE MATTER OF: Suit for partition, to divide the suit
property equally in metes and
bounds among the plaintiff’s, the
suit property belongs to the
grandfather of the parties namely
Late Sh. Girdhari Lal, With
consequential relief directing the
defendant not to eliminate or
change the present position in the
suit property in any manner,
whatsoever or through anybody.
Suit property is fully described as
under:-
Plot/House No. 731/95-A,
Gandhi Nagar, Jammu
measuring 45’ x 65’ (2925
sq.ft.) over which single
storey house is existing,
consisting five rooms, one
lobby, kitchen, two bathrooms
covered with surrounding wall
and a gate. out of which the
plaintiff No.1 is in possession
of one room, & lobby and
plaintiff No.2 is in possession
of two rooms and defendant is
in possession of two rooms
and parties are having joint
possession over kitchen and
vacant land and same be
required to divide through the
present suit equally in metes
and bound under law between
the parties of suit.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR,
The plaintiffs most respectfully submits as
under:-
1. The fact of the suit is, the grandfather of the parties
plaintiffs and defendant No.1 got allotted a plot from
the Housing Department, Jammu on 21-05-1960. Copy
of allotment dated 21-05-1960 is annexed as
annexure-A along with the copy of lease deed of
grandfather of plaintiff as annexure-B.
2. That the grandfather of the plaintiffs was died about
30 Year back and after the death of grandfather, the
father and mother alongwith plaintiffs and defendants
came in possession, use and occupation of the suit
property.
3. That, the father of plaintiffs and defendant Late Mohan
Lal Sharma was died in year 2015 and mother of
plaintiffs and defendant was died on 28-06-2024.
4. That, the mother of the parties was died on 28-06-
2024 and the suit property was remain undivided and
all the parties having joint possession over the suit
property and individually plaintiff no.1 is using one
room, one lobby from the suit property and plaintiff
no.2 is using two room and defendant is using two
rooms and kitchen, bathroom is used commonly by all
the parties.
5. That, the suit property is not the self-acquired
property of father & mother of plaintiffs and
defendant. So, they have no right for giving the
property to anybody in their life time and suit property
is a property of grandfather of plaintiffs and
defendant. The plaintiffs and defendant having birth
right over the property of their grandfather.
6. That, the plaintiffs and defendant are only daughters
alive of their parents and they have legal right equally
over the suit property of their grandfather.
7. That, the plaintiffs even after their marriage are
continuously using and leaving the suit property as per
their share and defendant who is married in Himachal
also coming to Jammu off and on for meeting the
parents and also the plaintiffs and having good
relation.
8. That, after death of mother of plaintiffs, the defendant
who is under influence of her husband started to
caused obstacle for plaintiffs for using the suit
property and to perform the rituals of their mother
after death.
9. That, the plaintiffs on 15-07-2024 when the plaintiffs
started to perform the rituals of their mother, the
defendant and her husband and her associates had
restrained the plaintiffs and defendant told they will
not allow the plaintiffs to do any prays for the piece of
sole of their mother in the suit property and told she
will not divide the suit property in equal share. So,
cause of action accrued for the plaintiffs to file the
present suit against the defendant, hence the present
suit is filed.
10. That suit property/land falls within the jurisdiction
of this Hon’ble Court and the parties are also at
present resident of Jammu, hence this Hon’ble Court
has the jurisdiction to try the present suit.
11. That the valuation of the suit for the purpose of
court fees and jurisdiction is fixed at Rs. 25,500/- and
court fees is fixed accordingly.
An affidavit in support is annexed herewith.
PRAYER:-
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that in
view of the facts and circumstances stated herein
above and those to be urged at the time of hearing,
this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to pass a
decree for partition, to divide the suit property equally
in metes and bounds among the plaintiff’s, the suit
property belongs to the grandfather of the parties
namely Late Sh. Girdhari Lal, With consequential relief
directing the defendant not to eliminate or change the
present position in the suit property in any manner,
whatsoever or through anybody. Suit property is fully
described as under:-
Plot/House No. 731/95-A, Gandhi Nagar,
Jammu measuring 45’ x 65’ (2925 sq.ft.) over
which single storey house is existing, consisting
five rooms, one lobby, kitchen, two bathrooms
covered with surrounding wall and a gate. out
of which the plaintiff No.1 is in possession of
one room, & lobby and plaintiff No.2 is in
possession of two rooms and defendant is in
possession of two rooms and parties are having
joint possession over kitchen and vacant land
and same be required to divide through the
present suit equally in metes and bound under
law between the parties of suit.
Or
Any other relief in addition or alternative which
the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper plaintiff
entitled for may also be passed in favor of plaintiff
against the defendant.
Plaintiff
Through Counsel
VERIFICATION
Verified today this __th day of July 2024 at Jammu that
averments made in Para No. 01 to ___ of the plaint are true
& correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and rest of
Para’s No. ___ to 13 are believed to be true and correct on
the basis of legal advice and information received from
counsel.
Plaintiff
BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT
JUDGE, JAMMU
Amanat Ali V/s Syed Mumtaz Hussain Shah Bukhari
IN THE MATTER OF:- Affidavit in support of plaint.
AFFIDAVIT
I, Amanat Ali, Age 31 Years S/o Bagh Ali R/o Ratti
Sarari, Sunjwan, Sainik Colony, Tehsil Bahu District
Jammu, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1. That the accompanying plaint has been drawn and
drafted by my counsel as per my instructions and the
information provided by me.
2. That the contents of the accompanying plaint have
been read over and explained to me in my language,
which I have gone through and some are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Deponent
VERIFICATION
Verified at Jammu on this ____ July 2024 that the
averments made above are true and to the best of my
knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed
there from.
Deponent
BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT OF PRINICIPAL DISTRICT
JUDGE, JAMMU
Anuradha Sharma & Anr. V/s Tejashwari Sharma
…..Applicants ……Non-Applicant
IN THE MATTER OF:- Civil suit.
&
IN THE MATTER OF:- Application for grant of interim
relief under order 39 rule 1 and 2
read with section 151 cpc for
restraining the non-applicant from
interfering in performing any
rituals of their mother after her
death in suit property of share of
applicants in any manner
whatsoever and also restrain the
non-applicant to interfere from
using the suit property by the
applicants of their share, till the
final disposal of main suit.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR,
The applicants most respectfully submit as
under:-
1. That the applicants have filed the above titled suit
against the non-applicant before this Hon’ble court
which is sure to succeed on its merit.
2. That in view of avoiding the repetition and curtail
the length of this application, the grounds of main
suit may also be taken as part of this application.
3. That the applicants have a very strong prima facie
case in their favor and against the non-applicant.
The balance of convenience also lies in favour of
the applicants.
4. That matter involved in the present suit is of
emergent nature, as such, prior notice under order
39 rule 3 read with section 151 cpc may be
dispensed with.
5. That the applicants will suffer an irreparable loss if
the non-applicant is not restrained at this stage
which cannot be compensated in any manner later
on.
An affidavit in support of application is enclosed
herewith.
PRAYER:-
It is therefore, most humbly prayed that the
necessary order for restraining the non-applicant from
interfering in performing any rituals of their mother
after her death in suit property of share of applicants
in any manner whatsoever and also restrain the non-
applicant to interfere from using the suit property by
the applicants of their share, till the final disposal of
main suit, in the interest of justice and fair play.
Or
Any other relief.
Dated:-19-7-2024 Applicants
Through Counsel
BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT OF PRINICIPAL DISTRICT
JUDGE, JAMMU
Sudarshan Kumar Misra V/s Lakshmi Narayan Mishra
IN THE MATTER OF:- Affidavit in support of plaint.
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sudarshan Kumar Misra, Age 68 Years S/o Late
Udhey Chand Misra R/o 455-A, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu,
do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1. That the accompanying plaint has been drawn and
drafted by my counsel as per my instructions and
the information provided by me.
2. That the contents of the accompanying plaint have
been read over and explained to me in my
language, which I have gone through and some are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
Deponent
VERIFICATION
Verified at Jammu on this ____ May 2024 that the
averments made above are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed
there from.
Deponent
